Milney updates

[Moods]

I am actually glad that this matter eventually has made it to Committal. The gory details and morality of all involved is a little questionable. However there are plenty of people I have spoken to since this has been reported who have said, 'is that all that happened?' If this female was in fact raped by Milney, why wasn't Joey and the other female in the room charged as accessories? They were there, they did nothing to stop it. Nothing. Whilst Milney isn't likely to get any community awards any time soon, I reckon a few ppl over the years who cried out 'Rapist!' when he got the ball may soon feel a little sheepish. So many questions hang over the alleged victims head. I hate to say it, but it reads like she was a more than willing participant, but was more into Joey than Milney. Got a bit jealous when she realised that Joey was having sex with her friend - beside her

I agree with Mullet.

P66 - the OPP have proceeded against Milne after political pressure. It's becoming obvious I reckon.

To think Dayne Beams walked away scot free a few years back, in almost identical circumstances. Wasn't even charged.

I have no idea how you know beams was an almost identical case and it is going to trial which means there is enough evidence for it to go to trial. I have been with Milney all the way with this from what i heard years ago but like all things its only one side of the story. I doubt Milney will get a conviction but I also doubt it is now at trial after political pressure and i know you didnt actually say that. I also unsure how people can be an accessory when they didnt even know a rape may have been commoitted.

You can't be an accessory for doing nothing to stop a crime.

You're right. Silly comment by me. My point is they were all so close together they were just about part of the act. It defies belief.

Having said that, and Iceman will probably back me up - I've spoken to detectives who have had wins (or finding of guilt) for rape and they thought for sure the matter would be thrown out, and vice versa. It's almost like some of these sex crimes where both parties know each other, and the issue is consent, is a complete raffle.

[Furphy]

If a certain 'former St.Kilda player' who didn't play one game for us was not convicted, Milney should be easily vindicated.

[Gershwin]

The papers seem to be stuck on "Footy Sluts".

I'm confused.

There's thousands of them out there .
They may not like the term sl*t , however imo if you are prepared to have sex with some bloke you met three hours early then thats what you are .
I'd also question the morals of the men .

And if a bloke is prepared to have sex with a woman he met 3 hours earlier what do you call him?

[Gershwin]

I was in a jury on a rape case where a woman claimed she was raped by her boyfriend at the time. He said the screams that the next door neighbour heard were just because it was 'rough sex' and the girlfriend had consented. The jury was 11 - 1 on finding him not guilty so no result was obtained. Not sure if it went on to another trial but the prosecution said to me that it was incredibly difficult to find a bloke guilty unless there were rock-solid witnesses.
If the girl, her friend and Montagna say that the girl said 'no' (which they said in the commital hearing) then I reckon he could be in trouble.

[perfectionist]

...And if a bloke is prepared to have sex with a woman he met 3 hours earlier what do you call him?

I can remember reading once that whenever one (post puberty) person meets another, both make an almost instantaneous decision about whether the other is a viable sex partner or not. Most times the decision is easy - wrong sex, too old, too young, too tall, too whatever. Most times it never amounts to anything, much to the chagrin of some. The other thing to remember is that there is just a many men having sex as women. Using sexist terms to describe women who do what those who use the terms would like to do is as old as the hills. These people are often men, but in my experience, women are far more critical of the mores of other women than men.

[R. Harvey 3 votes!]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

[slider]

I reckon we all wait until August and see how it pans out.

Other than that we have a new coach and some early picks

[satchmo]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

This is an issue.
What would be the most commonly used word in relation to Stephen Milne?

[dragit]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

This is an issue.

Malthouse and Licuria no good for jury duty?

[satchmo]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

This is an issue.

Malthouse and Licuria no good for jury duty?

Nor anyone that followed that club.

[Waltzing St Kilda]

Anyone else bothered that the media keeps running with the juicy "rape of a nineteen year old" line that fails to acknowledge that Milne had just turned 24 at the time? Oh, that's right, St Kilda players have a thing for teenage girls.

[perfectionist]

Anyone else bothered that the media keeps running with the juicy "rape of a nineteen year old" line that fails to acknowledge that Milne had just turned 24 at the time? Oh, that's right, St Kilda players have a thing for teenage girls.

Actually, the HUN doesn't even qualify it with "nineteen". They run the "teen" line. You know, like "thirteen". Dirty, deceiving scum.

[happy feet]

I'm sorry but we all seem to have missed the point a bit. How the hell did two players get themselves into this situation? Alarm bells should have been ringing, they should have avoided these two girls. We are lucky Joey is not on trial as well. I hope this serves as a warning to other young men. Decisions always have consequences, some of them life changing.

[stinger]

Committed to stand trial

yeah...gutless magistrate.....

The magistrate has to decide if there is sufficient evidence that a conviction could be made.

After all the prosecution evidence has been given the Magistrate must decide whether, the prosecution evidence is capable of satisfying a reasonable jury, properly instructed, beyond reasonable doubt that you have committed an indictable offence. If the Magistrate does not believe the evidence would satisfy a jury, the Magistrate will dismiss the charges. If the Magistrate believes the evidence would satisfy a jury the hearing continues.

The "properly instructed" part of the above quote is important as it relates to the judge and their instructions to the jury after all the evidence has been heard.

The fact is that there is enough evidence to take it to trial. Her testimony accuses Milne of raping her. Her friends testimony supports this, as does the testimony of the charging police officer.

The magistrate can really only throw it out if there is a lack of evidence. It's not for the magistrate to decide his guilt, just whether there is enough evidence.

In this case there is not.

Don't have a go at the magistrate, they aren't passing judgement on Milne, just the evidence before them.

as i said..the guy's gutless......the evidence doesn't stand up for mine....and there is not enough there for a jury to be satisfied beyound reasonable doubt....victorian magistrates are notorious for rubber stamping briefs and sending them upstairs......

...

[asaint]

Yep.Alcohol, egos & opportunity.Not many young guys could resist.However,a good lesson to never get in a position that you can be compromised.
I am upset for all involved.Love the guy as a player & need to believe in his innocence.
Do not think it would have seen a courtroom if they were not footballers.

[I Love Peter Kiel]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

That is absolutely right, unfortunately!!
One of the best points so far!

[St.Roly]

as i said..the guy's gutless......the evidence doesn't stand up for mine....and there is not enough there for a jury to be satisfied beyound reasonable doubt....victorian magistrates are notorious for rubber stamping briefs and sending them upstairs......

...

I will keep my eye out to see if there is any further indication in any other reporting but for now the best we have is the Herald Sun stating the Phil Dunn "did not make any submissions"

You know what that means don't you Stinger?

[whiskers3614]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

Get a jury of his peers.
Broadmeadows/Cranbourne or Seaford residents maybe?

[ctqs]

How will Milne get a fair, unbiased, impartial jury? Everyone other than saints supporters hate Stephen Milne in this city?

This is an issue.
What would be the most commonly used word in relation to Stephen Milne?

He will get a fair trial.
The gang of hardened criminals on trial for the Walsh Street murders of police constables Tynan and Eyre were acquitted.
The man on trial for the murder of Jaidyn Leskie was acquitted.
The day before the 2009 Grand Final, Tony Mokbel was acquitted of the murder of Lewis Moran (but it couldn't be written about for ages!)
The bouncer on trial for the manslaughter of David Hookes was acquitted.
The driver who ploughed into a group of kids in Mildura, killing six and injuring a group of others was acquitted of the most serious charges and was convicted on MUCH lesser charges.
The same applied to the man called Jihad Jack Thomas, who faced terrorism-related offences yet was convicted of a passport offence, to which he was prepared to plead guilty anyway.
My point is, no matter how emotive, prejudicial, extended, or white-hot the pre-trial publicity, jurours do their duty as they are called upon and swear (or affirm) to do.

[kosifantutti]

But how many of them played for St Kilda?

[Teflon]

as i said..the guy's gutless......the evidence doesn't stand up for mine....and there is not enough there for a jury to be satisfied beyound reasonable doubt....victorian magistrates are notorious for rubber stamping briefs and sending them upstairs......

...

I will keep my eye out to see if there is any further indication in any other reporting but for now the best we have is the Herald Sun stating the Phil Dunn "did not make any submissions"

You know what that means don't you Stinger?

No - do tell legal eagle

[stinger]

as i said..the guy's gutless......the evidence doesn't stand up for mine....and there is not enough there for a jury to be satisfied beyound reasonable doubt....victorian magistrates are notorious for rubber stamping briefs and sending them upstairs......

...

I will keep my eye out to see if there is any further indication in any other reporting but for now the best we have is the Herald Sun stating the Phil Dunn "did not make any submissions"

You know what that means don't you Stinger?

yes mate..nough said

[St.Roly]

as i said..the guy's gutless......the evidence doesn't stand up for mine....and there is not enough there for a jury to be satisfied beyound reasonable doubt....victorian magistrates are notorious for rubber stamping briefs and sending them upstairs......

...

I will keep my eye out to see if there is any further indication in any other reporting but for now the best we have is the Herald Sun stating the Phil Dunn "did not make any submissions"

You know what that means don't you Stinger?

No - do tell legal eagle

What it would mean is that at the close of the prosecution "case" at committal - when the balance of the hand-up brief is tendered- the defence did not take up their opportunity to submit to the Magistrate that there is not sufficient evidence to commit. This is, in its practical effect, a concession that there is sufficient evidence to commit. And yet, according to His Honour Judge Stinger, the Magistrate was "gutless" in committing.

Even more interesting here is that the Magistrate has not committed on one of the charges. If (and it is a big "if") the news report is correct and there were no defence submissions, this would mean that the Magistrate has taken this decison of his own volition or perhaps at the suggestion of the prosecutor. Again, not really deserving of the slur "gutless" IMHO.

[stinger]

What it would mean is that at the close of the prosecution "case" at committal - when the balance of the hand-up brief is tendered- the defence did not take up their opportunity to submit to the Magistrate that there is not sufficient evidence to commit. This is, in its practical effect, a concession that there is sufficient evidence to commit. And yet, according to His Honour Judge Stinger, the Magistrate was "gutless" in committing.

Even more interesting here is that the Magistrate has not committed on one of the charges. If (and it is a big "if") the news report is correct and there were no defence submissions, this would mean that the Magistrate has taken this decison of his own volition or perhaps at the suggestion of the prosecutor. Again, not really deserving of the slur "gutless" IMHO.

yes he does......maybe defence counsel was just keeping his powder dry......the beak did not commit on the digital penetration charge because the girl had stated that it didn't happen...even though milne admitted to the police that it did......you look silly.... to me anyway...... having a shot at me ...been around committal proceedings since 1966 actually.....victorian courts are one system where you could do away with the committal process, because magistrates as a rule don't have the balls not to commit


...i said enough said because i was accepting of what you were inferring...not that i agreed ...but hey...i'm not there......milne's legal team were.......

...but...you got one bit right...

[St.Roly]

What it would mean is that at the close of the prosecution "case" at committal - when the balance of the hand-up brief is tendered- the defence did not take up their opportunity to submit to the Magistrate that there is not sufficient evidence to commit. This is, in its practical effect, a concession that there is sufficient evidence to commit. And yet, according to His Honour Judge Stinger, the Magistrate was "gutless" in committing.

Even more interesting here is that the Magistrate has not committed on one of the charges. If (and it is a big "if") the news report is correct and there were no defence submissions, this would mean that the Magistrate has taken this decison of his own volition or perhaps at the suggestion of the prosecutor. Again, not really deserving of the slur "gutless" IMHO.

yes he does......maybe defence counsel was just keeping his powder dry......the beak did not commit on the digital penetration charge because the girl had stated that it didn't happen...even though milne admitted to the police that it did......you look silly.... to me anyway...... having a shot at me ...been around committal proceedings since 1966 actually.....victorian courts are one system where you could do away with the committal process, because magistrates as a rule don't have the balls not to commit


...i said enough said because i was accepting of what you were inferring...not that i agreed ...but hey...i'm not there......milne's legal team were.......

...but...you got one bit right...

Whether or not Dunn was keeping his powder dry does not change the fact that making no submissions is tacit acknowledgement that there is enough to commit. To call a Magistrate gutless in those circumstances remains, in my opinion, entirely unjustified.

Further, if you have been "around committal proceedings" (whatever that actually means) since 1966 then you would perhaps appreciate that a fundamental issue (as has been recognised in reviews of the system) is whether the committal test that Magistrates are called upon to apply is too weak, as opposed to the "balls" of the magistracy.