Justice Brandis
Long ago in a far-off land, John Howard murdered someone.
When questioned by police, he protested his innocence.
The police could take no action, because they didn’t have enough evidence — Howard had ensured that key witnesses wouldn’t co-operate with the police.
One of those key witnesses, Mike Scrafton, eventually broke his silence. The police re-opened the investigation, but Howard continued to deny he had committed the crime.
The matter went to court, and Howard was found guilty based partly on Scrafton’s evidence but also because other witnesses now had the confidence to come forward.
Howard still said he didn’t do it.
When it came time for sentencing, Justice Brandis decided to let him go free.
“No, I don’t think that follows at all (that Howard should be punished if found guilty),” Justice Brandis told the court. “Mr Howard’s version of these events has been consistent from the start.”
I just don’t think that follows at all!
These are the people who would be deciding what reasonable opinion is under ruddock’s defo proposals!
I hope they don’t get the proposals through, and the Howard gov gets out this election, or freedom of speech will be left to be dictated by the likes of this – sigh…