The presumption of innocence is a criminal trial requirement, to allow due process. It is not an immunity from civil claims or media commentary.

What we know is that prostitutes were purchased using his credit card, with his signature, and drivers license as proof of identity. We also know that Thomson and Williamson gave a contract to a PR firm for substantial kickbacks. This has been published in the Fairfax media (not Newscorp) and Thomson challenged this in court and lost.

According to your way of thinking, Hitler is innocent.

A few years ago Matt Birney (State Liberal mp) was hounded by the ABC over some very trivial matters (compared with those of Craig Thomson) and caved in and resigned. Now it appears to any fair minded person that Craig Thompson's union credit card was used to abuse girls through prostitution. The double standards of our public broadcasters trying to protect the Government and themselves is beyond a joke. Thankfully the polling reflects the views of what the public think of a Government that has no equal when it comes to sleaze. Don't forget this is also Oakshott and Windsors concept of open and accountable Government.

As usual, I'm with Runner on this.

Following due process, and presumption of innocence - yes, indeed.

But also, Julia, remember that justice delayed is justice denied, in the court of the electorate.

Joe

No legal brief, so give the man doubt of guilt. Maybe the happenings were that inconclusive, it takes a DPP to try and unravel it.
Which ever way it is, impatience from the noalition will get nowhere.

As we all know media ownership in Australia is
notoriously narrow. Mainstream media offers
precious little diversity, and such diversity
as there is runs along predictable lines.
And also as we see regularly - the internet
also offers a vast supply - especially of
opinion. To dive into that pool to learn
something different is to risk drowning.

Who knows what the end result of Mr Thomson's
case will be. We have to wait and see. He hasn't
been charged with anything yet - and no-one is
suggesting immunity from criminal charges if
he is found to be guilty. Judgements shouldn't
be made ahead of time.

I believe the Coalition are going so strongly after Mr Thomson simply to bring down the Government. Where was all their outrage when one of their own was found guilty of assault (an act of violence), with no conviction recorded. Oh, yes, that wouldn't have made any difference to the numbers, because she was a Senator.

The names of the persons to whom this report refer should be kept confidential until it is proven that charges should be laid. Only then should the names be made public. Courts provide this for other criminal elements, why not these people?