![](https://images.bigfootymedia.com/icons/mobile-bullets/richmond.png)
- Oct 4, 2016
- 8,688
- 14,118
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Semi Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
It's totally on-brand for people like Deeming and other conservatives who complain about "cancel culture" being the first to utilise defamation laws to stop people talking about their actions.Parliamentarians can't sue for anything said about them under parliamentary privilege either. And there are ways of addressing and holding parliamentarians accountable for things said under parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege exists so our laws can be debated without fear of things like defamation.
And parliamentarians got themselves elected.
We are seeing a lot of high profile cases lately, but as far as the political world is concerned, not a lot of them are succeeding. Mrs Deeming is next unfortunately.
It would be foolish for Dutton to pursue this in court and I don't think he will do so.It's totally on-brand for people like Deeming and other conservatives who complain about "cancel culture" being the first to utilise defamation laws to stop people talking about their actions.
Peter Dutton trying to prove he isn't racist in court would be glorious. It would be a pretty decent expose of the inherent racism of the Australian Government.
Same could be said about Lehrman (rapist), Reynolds(vindictive), Deeming(tbc) and Ben Roberts-Smith(war criminal).It would be foolish for Dutton to pursue this in court and I don't think he will do so.
At least Senator Reynolds has the backing of the bots.
View attachment 2082079
View attachment 2082081
Glad they both got good representation.
sad but true, and higgins as well.As someone intelligently pointed out in a post in the thread on this case in the crime forum, this scattergun approach from Reynolds’ legal team is probably as much about intimidating Higgins’ supporters as it is about billable hours.
"The bots wouldn't obey my court order!"Lawyers representing Senator Reynolds sought a contempt of court order to stop the bot postings from Justice Paul Tottle, who is presiding over the defamation trial.
However, Justice Tottle questioned whether such an order "would have any effect whatsoever", noting none of the posts came from a mainstream media organisation.
"A warning issued in this court out into the Twittersphere ... may serve no real purpose at all," he said.
FMD - Linda Reynolds is a former Minister for Defence in the Morrison Government yet here's her defence team wanting a WA Supreme Court Justice to issue a contempt of court order to stop AI bots on social media.
Good luck with that.
Did Linda Reynolds have any comment on who has ordered the bots?Lawyers representing Senator Reynolds sought a contempt of court order to stop the bot postings from Justice Paul Tottle, who is presiding over the defamation trial.
However, Justice Tottle questioned whether such an order "would have any effect whatsoever", noting none of the posts came from a mainstream media organisation.
"A warning issued in this court out into the Twittersphere ... may serve no real purpose at all," he said.
FMD - Linda Reynolds is a former Minister for Defence in the Morrison Government yet here's her defence team wanting a WA Supreme Court Justice to issue a contempt of court order to stop AI bots on social media.
Good luck with that.
Given that they seem to love Rinehart as well the WA chubby chaser community would seem as good a place as any to start.Did Linda Reynolds have any comment on who has ordered the bots?
I doubt it is Russian or Chinese interference this time. Someone has ordered and paid for this. Who? Why?
Did Linda Reynolds have any comment on who has ordered the bots?
I doubt it is Russian or Chinese interference this time. Someone has ordered and paid for this. Who? Why?
As someone who will be 60 at the next election, with 12 years in the Senate under her belt and having already been in Cabinet, they would have tapped her on the shoulder anyway.Higgins is not even testifying any more - what a monumental screw up this is turning out to be
Young said there were three reasons behind the decision.
“The first is the defendant is not obliged to go into oral evidence,” she said.
“The second is … we don’t think we need to call Ms Higgins to satisfy Your Honour as to being successful in these proceedings.
“The third is a matter of Ms Higgins’ medical state.”
......
Earlier in the court hearing, the WA Liberal party selection committee chair, Jeremy Buxton, gave evidence that the furore around Higgins and her boss at the time would likely have affected the senator’s re-election chances if she had not chosen to retire at the next election.
Buxton said that while Reynolds had been a well-regarded senator, she could have “been struggling … to get the third position” on the Liberal election ticket.
“It is very likely … there would be a feeling among a considerable number of delegates that [she] had mishandled the situation in her office, that she may have been unethical in her cover-up,” he said.
![]()
Brittany Higgins will no longer give evidence at Linda Reynolds’ defamation trial, lawyer tells court
Rachael Young tells court Higgins’ ‘medical state’ forms part of the reasoning behind no longer calling her to give evidencewww.theguardian.com
Did it have nothing to do with either of them?No she didn’t and neither has Higgins’ legal team. I mean what do you say to this sort of garbage that no doubt had nothing to do with either of them.
I think someone in Australia had something to do with it, but given how piss poor and transparent it was, it couldn’t have cost them much. I mean someone in Tennessee creating a twitter account just to support the personal defamation case of an Australian senator and attack the US Democrat presidential candidate is laughable.
Yep. My guess is that this all about the life after politics she imagined she would have.As someone who will be 60 at the next election, with 12 years in the Senate under her belt and having already been in Cabinet, they would have tapped her on the shoulder anyway.
And her resignation statement was quite upbeat for someone claiming their life has been ruined by an Instagram Story.
It is incomprehensible how poorly Reynolds has handled this.Yep. My guess is that this all about the life after politics she imagined she would have.
She probably envisaged herself as a well paid political lobbyist for the defence industry or her and her partner as diplomats in the US or UK given her previous role as Brigadier in the Defence Force Reserves and Defence Minister prior to the AUKUS deal.
And she blames Dutton and Brittany Higgins for taking that away from her, refusing to believe or accept that she might have been responsible for her own reputational destruction - that is continuing with this vengeful defamation action against a rape victim and now pregnant woman who used to be her own staffer.
Well the previous judge of her case did try and warn her (and her victim/defendant) of the consequences of going to court, multiple times (which is why he recused himself from the trial proper).It is incomprehensible how poorly Reynolds has handled this.
Yet her own testimony showed that all the damage was done prior to the posts in question.Yep. My guess is that this all about the life after politics she imagined she would have.
She probably envisaged herself as a well paid political lobbyist for the defence industry or her and her partner as diplomats in the US or UK given her previous role as Brigadier in the Defence Force Reserves and Defence Minister prior to the AUKUS deal.
And she blames Dutton and Brittany Higgins for taking that away from her, refusing to believe or accept that she might have been responsible for her own reputational destruction - that is continuing with this vengeful defamation action against a rape victim and now pregnant woman who used to be her own staffer.
She's angry that the questions in Parliament caused the nose-dive of her career. But she couldn't sue the ALP Senators or the Liberal Party, so she waited, then somebody popped their heads up for her to sue. You'd pity her if she wasn't so vindictive about pursuing rape victims in court.Yet her own testimony showed that all the damage was done prior to the posts in question.
This is completely untrue. It's the conservatives, by far, who are more likely to go to litigation to stop people saying bad things about them. Trump's team do this all the time. It's the same in Australia. Dutton threatens it all the time and the conservatives are always suing news networks and settling.In the US of A, trying to litigate your political enemy away is currently labelled as a lefty thing.
(Everyone v Trump cases).
Reynolds is probably now regarded as a bit too wet, and a lefty within the Liberal Party.
I think they were saying that it is labeled as a lefty thing, not that it was true.This is completely untrue. It's the conservatives, by far, who are more likely to go to litigation to stop people saying bad things about them. Trump's team do this all the time. It's the same in Australia. Dutton threatens it all the time and the conservatives are always suing news networks and settling.
I should have written "mis-labelled" (will go back and correct this).I think they were saying that it is labeled as a lefty thing, not that it was true.
Exactly.Yet her own testimony showed that all the damage was done prior to the posts in question.