Ford Fairlane
Moderator
- Feb 21, 2002
- 81,966
- 202,285
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Magpies
- Moderator
- #26
SpringChoke said:Your right. It does amount to news. But it could also be argued that the sexual assult of a young girl by 3 Sth Australian footballers also would seem pretty newsworthy. But I don't recall seeing front page and 2-3 pages on that incident.
As for Goodwin and co., pretty stupid thing to do. Especially when you consider our daily rag has been gunning for anti-Crows material for a few years now.
You won't buy an argument from me about the sort of tabloid paper the Advertiser has become. The trouble is, its tabloid, one paper status means this sort of story will be front page news - the minute a hand was laid on one of their employees - in daylight, in a public street, in front of witnesses - that's what it became. As others have said, they sent Rebekah Devlin out ... it was only ever going to be a fluff piece, but Goodwin blew it up through his actions. This is the dark side of the cult of personality that tabloids pursue. You see it in the British papers except they're light years 'ahead' when it comes to that. They will create news ... in this case it was created for the tiser.
Just on the definition of assault Macca ... from here
Words only and Assault
Words alone do not amount to an assault. So a person could threaten to kill someone else and this would not attract criminal liability for assault. It may, however, be grounds for the other person to rely upon to obtain an Apprehended Violence Order. If made over the phone or internet, it would amount to an offence under the telecommunications law. However, it would not amount to assault. There is no such law relating to verbal assault. For such words to amount to an assault there must be some corresponding physical action by the accused.
The words, taken with the physical action, may then amount to an assault. For the offence to be made out in these circumstances the accused must be able to carry out the threat immediately. So if the accused, who is in Sydney, rang a person who is in Broken Hill and threatened to shoot them, then this would not amount to an offence. The reason for this is that the threat could not be carried out immediately after the threat had been made. However, if the threat, made over the phone from one house to a house next door and the gun was being pointed out of a window by the accused, then this would amount to an assault because the threat is able to be carried out immediately upon the making of the threat.
In a street situation, again a threat by an accused to belt a person not accompanied with any physical action would not be an assault even though the victim may apprehend that violence. However, if the accused held his fists up in a boxing pose while he said the words and was in the near presence of the victim, then the assault would be complete.