New proble looms on Milne rape case according to the Hun!

[Leo.J]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Police officer that was recently suspended because of his relationship with a teenager, investigating the Collingwood case???

Thats how it was reported in the early days, then all of a sudden every journos memory or investigative ability failed them.

So why no mention of this in the HS?

[Moods]

They prepared a brief of evidence against Milne, but their superior officer decided not to lay charges after advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions that there was no reasonable chance of a conviction.

None of the crap they are dredging up changes the above fact.

They weren't going to charge him with rape, they were going to charge him with sexual misconduct, but on the evidence it was clear that they wouldn't get a conviction. The girl got into bed with three other people twice for the purpose of having sex. No evidence is missing, all statements say the pretty much the same thing... She willingly got into bed with them, and no force was used.
So it's completely different to the collingwood rape.

Really? What is sexual misconduct? Never heard of that charge before in my life. It wasn't an AFL investigation it was a police investigation, and he was investigated for rape and had no case to answer in the end. As for the Collingwood allegation. What do you know? I'm tipping you know absolutely nothing other than what you have heard.

Milne wasn't accused of rape, so it wasn't a rape investigation. There was never a suggestion that force was used. Of course if you read the hs you wouldn't have read that.

I'm tipping that you need help with your tipping.

Who says you have to use force for it to be rape? Rape is about consent, it's not just about force. Evidence of injuries sustained is a way of proving rape, but it isn't the only factor involved every time. Not sure what newspaper your getting your info from, but I suggest you change before stating facts that are wrong on public forums.

P.S. - I won $500 on my tipping last year

[matrix]

[satchmo]

They prepared a brief of evidence against Milne, but their superior officer decided not to lay charges after advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions that there was no reasonable chance of a conviction.

None of the crap they are dredging up changes the above fact.

They weren't going to charge him with rape, they were going to charge him with sexual misconduct, but on the evidence it was clear that they wouldn't get a conviction. The girl got into bed with three other people twice for the purpose of having sex. No evidence is missing, all statements say the pretty much the same thing... She willingly got into bed with them, and no force was used.
So it's completely different to the collingwood rape.

Really? What is sexual misconduct? Never heard of that charge before in my life. It wasn't an AFL investigation it was a police investigation, and he was investigated for rape and had no case to answer in the end. As for the Collingwood allegation. What do you know? I'm tipping you know absolutely nothing other than what you have heard.

Milne wasn't accused of rape, so it wasn't a rape investigation. There was never a suggestion that force was used. Of course if you read the hs you wouldn't have read that.

I'm tipping that you need help with your tipping.

Who says you have to use force for it to be rape? Rape is about consent, it's not just about force. Evidence of injuries sustained is a way of proving rape, but it isn't the only factor involved every time. Not sure what newspaper your getting your info from, but I suggest you change before stating facts that are wrong on public forums.

P.S. - I won $500 on my tipping last year

I suggest that you take your own advice before you offer it to others. Especially when making claims as to tipping prowess!

[White Winmar]

Moods is right. Rape can involve any of the elements of force, fear of fraud. I recall that at the time the main issue seemed to be one of mistaken identity, that is the victim thought she was having sex with Leigh Montagna and not Milne. The issue seemed to be that she wouldn't have consented to sex with Milne if she knew it was him.

The difficulty in proving a charge like this seems to be showing that Milne deliberately deceived her into thinking he was Montagna, or someone else she wanted to have consensual sex with. Force relates to violence, fraud to deception and fear, the threat to harm or disadvantage the victim in some way. Good luck trying to prove this after seven years.

Unless there have been some new developments, new evidence has come to light, or Milne falls to his knees and confesses, the chances are zero. The conduct of the police may draw disciplinary charges, but if the facts are still the same as they were, then the OPP will no doubt come to the same conclusions it did in 2004.

[Eastern]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Police officer that was recently suspended because of his relationship with a teenager, investigating the Collingwood case???

Thats how it was reported in the early days, then all of a sudden every journos memory or investigative ability failed them.

So why no mention of this in the HS?

I think that the cop you speak of was in charge of the "Diversion?" program she was placed on as a result of her thieving a pair of jeans !!

[Dr Spaceman]

Without trying to make light of the situation it appears to me that there must have been an abundance of alcohol and loud heavy metal music, combined with a total lack of illumination.

Otherwise, how anyone could mistake Yapper for someone else is totally beyond me

[Sainternist]

What I think is 'interesting' about this new article is that the alleged victim has changed from being a woman to a teenage student...

It is interesting. I think it has been the only piece of information that they've revealed about her throughout the entire 7 years of this ongoing scandal.

And why the bloody hell are these investigations taken place over the course of the AFL season?

Is the legal system adjourned from October until March?

[Moods]

Moods is right. Rape can involve any of the elements of force, fear of fraud. I recall that at the time the main issue seemed to be one of mistaken identity, that is the victim thought she was having sex with Leigh Montagna and not Milne. The issue seemed to be that she wouldn't have consented to sex with Milne if she knew it was him.

The difficulty in proving a charge like this seems to be showing that Milne deliberately deceived her into thinking he was Montagna, or someone else she wanted to have consensual sex with. Force relates to violence, fraud to deception and fear, the threat to harm or disadvantage the victim in some way. Good luck trying to prove this after seven years.

Unless there have been some new developments, new evidence has come to light, or Milne falls to his knees and confesses, the chances are zero. The conduct of the police may draw disciplinary charges, but if the facts are still the same as they were, then the OPP will no doubt come to the same conclusions it did in 2004.

Exactly right. But as in the past Satchmo will keep claiming black is white rather than lose face and admit he is wrong. Sad really

[Leo.J]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Police officer that was recently suspended because of his relationship with a teenager, investigating the Collingwood case???

Thats how it was reported in the early days, then all of a sudden every journos memory or investigative ability failed them.

So why no mention of this in the HS?

I think that the cop you speak of was in charge of the "Diversion?" program she was placed on as a result of her thieving a pair of jeans !!

Thats what I heard too.

But one of the creative writers from the HS joined the dots early on in an article, which was removed reasonably quickly.

When I say joined the dots, I mean insinuated.

[White Winmar]

Without making light of a seriously distressing situation, you are right Dr. Spaceman. Hence no charges, I would suggest. Alcohol, the dark and sexual desires running rampant. A recipe for trouble! The mistaken identity theory stretched credibility to breaking point. Any decent defense barrister would hit it for six within 5 minutes.

[satchmo]

Moods is right. Rape can involve any of the elements of force, fear of fraud. I recall that at the time the main issue seemed to be one of mistaken identity, that is the victim thought she was having sex with Leigh Montagna and not Milne. The issue seemed to be that she wouldn't have consented to sex with Milne if she knew it was him.

The difficulty in proving a charge like this seems to be showing that Milne deliberately deceived her into thinking he was Montagna, or someone else she wanted to have consensual sex with. Force relates to violence, fraud to deception and fear, the threat to harm or disadvantage the victim in some way. Good luck trying to prove this after seven years.

Unless there have been some new developments, new evidence has come to light, or Milne falls to his knees and confesses, the chances are zero. The conduct of the police may draw disciplinary charges, but if the facts are still the same as they were, then the OPP will no doubt come to the same conclusions it did in 2004.

Exactly right. But as in the past Satchmo will keep claiming black is white rather than lose face and admit he is wrong. Sad really

As in the past? Hmm was that when you wanted NZ authorities to charge Gilbert under Victorian law?

Or was that when you stated that it's illegal to consume alcohol with medication?

Btw ww is right except that the issue with consent is whether it can be withdrawn retrospectively. DPP stated that there was no chance of conviction, so why do still want him charged ?

[White Winmar]

I didn't know the OPP has made any statements indicating it wanted to charge Milne. As for the retrospective bit, that is what fraud is all about in this sort of charge. The question is, "Would you have given consent had you known the true identity/status of the alleged perpetrator?" In the case of the alleged victim in this case, the answer is apparently not.

The use of fraud in sex offences is common. A good example of complaining in retrospect is when a person consents to an invasive medical procedure, only to find out later that the person doing the procedure wasn't qualified to do so. You give your consent at the time because you believe all parties are acting legally and in good faith. If I pretend to be a gynecologist and perform an intrusive examination, I am guilty of rape because even if the patient gave her consent at the time, she would not have done so if she knew the truth. Therefore, there is no consent, and never was, because it was obtained fraudulently.

The same applies to identity fraud. The example of identical twins "switching" identities in order to have sex with the other one's partner is the relevant one here. Consent is given by the person believing they are having sex with their own partner, when in fact they are having sex with the identical twin. Upon discovering the truth a complaint is made. Again, there never was consent because of the fraudulent way it was "obtained" in the first place.

As with many rape cases, the issue of whether sex was consensual is the key element. I would have thought the evidence in this regard would've been closely examined in relation to any thought of charges being laid. The OPP obviously didn't regard the available evidence as being sufficient to sustain a charge/conviction. As I said earlier, unless something new has come to light, I doubt the matter will go any further, except for some naughty coppers getting a slap on the wrist for some internal breaches of the rules.

[Thinline]

What I find astounding is how there's so many lawyers on Saintsational.

[Dr Spaceman]

What I find astounding is how there's so many lawyers on Saintsational.

Yeah, but would you hire any of them

[satchmo]

As for the retrospective bit, that is what fraud is all about in this sort of charge. The question is, "Would you have given consent had you known the true identity/status of the alleged perpetrator?" In the case of the alleged victim in this case, the answer is apparently not.

Yes, Obviously the girl made it clear after the event that if she knew who it was that she wouldn't have consented. So the question is was she deliberately deceived, and if yes could it be proved in court. Highly unlikely.

So we have four people that have consumed much alcohol getting into bed and having fun, and no-one has a problem until the light comes on. Very unfortunate, but rape? Only the herald sun and collingwood supporters think so.

[Sainternist]

What I find astounding is how there's so many lawyers on Saintsational.

Yeah, but would you hire any of them

And not one of them decided on adopting the username:Lionel Hutz

[saintsRrising]

As for the retrospective bit, that is what fraud is all about in this sort of charge. The question is, "Would you have given consent had you known the true identity/status of the alleged perpetrator?" In the case of the alleged victim in this case, the answer is apparently not.

Yes, Obviously the girl made it clear after the event that if she knew who it was that she wouldn't have consented. So the question is was she deliberately deceived, and if yes could it be proved in court. Highly unlikely.

So we have four people that have consumed much alcohol getting into bed and having fun, and no-one has a problem until the light comes on. Very unfortunate, but rape? Only the herald sun and collingwood supporters think so.

Yes consent is the nub of it..and claimed mistaken identity.

However the reports of the time had her and Milne talking....and anyone who has heard Milne talk knows that his voice is very very distinctive.



IMO from all the info I have come across this is an instance of a groupie gf talking a a non-groupie gf into groupie activities and then the non-groupie gf deciding after the fact that she should not have indulged. particularly when the dad got involved.

In life we all make unwise decisions, but when you do you just have to face up to it.

[gringo]

When this came out at the end of last year I thought the DPP said it was not going to try for a charge against Milne unless during the investigation which was into Police Integrity- new evidence became available.

The whole story was meant to be on the fact the officer was bullied by other police.

the Dpp would need to have been duped by the police investigating who withheld evidence, which I thought the guy said the lawyers had access to the charge sheet - not withheld evidence.

It is unlikely that the case would look easier to prosecute now. They would need to find something very ugly to re open the case.

[Dr Spaceman]

However the reports of the time had her and Milne talking....and anyone who has heard Milne talk knows that his voice is very very distinctive

Exactly. Hard to believe Milney would have been stuck for words.

You'd have to think you're agreeing to have sex with Yapper or with one of the chipmunks. No other options.

[meher baba]

Like (I assume) every other poster, I have no idea what actually happened on that night in 2004. I strongly suspect that it was something pretty shameful, although not something which ultimately led to charges being laid.

Because I don't know what actually happened, I am not suggesting that a case of "mistaken identity" sex took place. However, I note some on here claim that that's what occurred and are, to some extent, making light of this: a mere case of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll, tinged with a bit of morning after regret on the part of the young lady.

But mistaken identity sex = non-consensual sex and anyone found not guilty of this on grounds other than that the victim was lying (eg, because there were no corroborating witnesses or other evidence) should consider himself very fortunate indeed. I think it relatively unlikely that a bloke in this situation would have not an inkling that the lady believed him to be someone else. I can also understand why a victim of such an incident might wish to keep pursuing her case seven years later: through the Herald-Sun, Mick'n'Eddie or whoever.

I also think any coppers involved in hampering an investigation because they were associated with a football club should be drummed out of the force and drummed into Pentridge.

I'm not saying that the case should be re-opened. It's an old, old case and IMO should be left alone, especially by the gutter press.

But none of us should make light of any of this, that's what I'm saying.

[stinger]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Police officer that was recently suspended because of his relationship with a teenager, investigating the Collingwood case???

Thats how it was reported in the early days, then all of a sudden every journos memory or investigative ability failed them.

So why no mention of this in the HS?

one more brick in the attempts to demonise st kilda.....new season about to start..this c*** wants to destabilize the saints...take your pick...

[Tess]

Notice the photo the hun posted to make Milney look like a serial killer? The same beat up story from the same scource that had no legs last year, just after Mr Malthouse's slanderous accusations. Remember when they ran that John Greening article a few years ago, just before Jim O'Dea's wedding?

Tess must be chief editor.

I would have linked this interview > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_5BZtKCTLo < and would never have allowed Color in interrupt the Black and White print!

As for the Collingwood player rumors, many pie supporters agree that if proven the player(s) should be moved on never to play for us again.

[Leo.J]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Police officer that was recently suspended because of his relationship with a teenager, investigating the Collingwood case???

Thats how it was reported in the early days, then all of a sudden every journos memory or investigative ability failed them.

So why no mention of this in the HS?

one more brick in the attempts to demonise st kilda.....new season about to start..this c*** wants to destabilize the saints...take your pick...

Who wants to destabilise the Saints?

[Moods]

Moods is right. Rape can involve any of the elements of force, fear of fraud. I recall that at the time the main issue seemed to be one of mistaken identity, that is the victim thought she was having sex with Leigh Montagna and not Milne. The issue seemed to be that she wouldn't have consented to sex with Milne if she knew it was him.

The difficulty in proving a charge like this seems to be showing that Milne deliberately deceived her into thinking he was Montagna, or someone else she wanted to have consensual sex with. Force relates to violence, fraud to deception and fear, the threat to harm or disadvantage the victim in some way. Good luck trying to prove this after seven years.

Unless there have been some new developments, new evidence has come to light, or Milne falls to his knees and confesses, the chances are zero. The conduct of the police may draw disciplinary charges, but if the facts are still the same as they were, then the OPP will no doubt come to the same conclusions it did in 2004.

Exactly right. But as in the past Satchmo will keep claiming black is white rather than lose face and admit he is wrong. Sad really

As in the past? Hmm was that when you wanted NZ authorities to charge Gilbert under Victorian law?

Or was that when you stated that it's illegal to consume alcohol with medication?

Btw ww is right except that the issue with consent is whether it can be withdrawn retrospectively. DPP stated that there was no chance of conviction, so why do still want him charged ?

Back pedaling a bit now aren't we? First it couldn't be rape b/c no force was used, now WW is right

BTW who wants Milne charged? Who are you referring to? I'm quite confident no-one who supports the saints wants Milne charged.

I won't bother rehashing our last debate, needless to say it's my belief that going by your twisting of facts I'm wondering if you're a journalist.