I think it is good to have somewhere to stay updated on the trial. But couldn't blame moderators if they get sick of trawling through the thread and removing all the shite.

Read it online. No need for speculations here.

Nobody here really knows how remote indigenous communities operate. There laws and beliefs are different to ours, they have even had white law forced on them. White law was in a sense an apartheid, illegal and probably exaserbated the problems indigenous people face.

I agree. We've smashed their culture thinking they'll easily assimilate. Just dumb shallow whiteman thinking.

What we've done to them is breakdown they're ways of life & left them in Nomans land.

Can't go back & can't go forward.

They're in anarchy.

Our society caused it.

Why should the thread be locked? It's pretty relevant and I haven't seen any particularly bad or inflammatory comments so far.

I agree there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed, particularly regarding the imposition if white culture/way of life on indigenous communities and then completely neglecting those communities. However I don't envision any society where getting drunk and attacking someone with a machete or other weapon/object as a means of extracting some kind of revenge could be seen as acceptable. I appreciate Liam's position must be very difficult with regards to being caught between the two feuding sides and this would only be exacerbated by his isolation from his community. However as a leader or elder of his community he should have done a better job in setting an example to his community rather than getting drunk and involved in a wild brawl with deadly weapons which he is alleged to have done.

I agree there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed, particularly regarding the imposition if white culture/way of life on indigenous communities and then completely neglecting those communities. However I don't envision any society where getting drunk and attacking someone with a machete or other weapon/object as a means of extracting some kind of revenge could be seen as acceptable. I appreciate Liam's position must be very difficult with regards to being caught between the two feuding sides and this would only be exacerbated by his isolation from his community. However as a leader or elder of his community he should have done a better job in setting an example to his community rather than getting drunk and involved in a wild brawl with deadly weapons which he is alleged to have done.

You just asked why the thread should be locked and this post would have to be Exhibit A as to why.

They are allegations, not facts, yet you write as though they have been proved and he has been convicted.

Of course its of interest. Most anything said here is likely to skirt or be inappropriate given the commital hearing is active.

And the defence rests lol

read it online. No need for speculations here.

And this isn't online?

I agree there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed, particularly regarding the imposition if white culture/way of life on indigenous communities and then completely neglecting those communities. However I don't envision any society where getting drunk and attacking someone with a machete or other weapon/object as a means of extracting some kind of revenge could be seen as acceptable. I appreciate Liam's position must be very difficult with regards to being caught between the two feuding sides and this would only be exacerbated by his isolation from his community. However as a leader or elder of his community he should have done a better job in setting an example to his community rather than getting drunk and involved in a wild brawl with deadly weapons which he is alleged to have done.

Well, how about our society a couple of hundred years ago? You have a problem with someone, you duel with pistols. Tom Cole writes in his book Hell West and Crooked how a farm hand stole several horses from him. Some time later he happened to see the man camped out with his horses. He walked into the camp, beat the hell out of him and left him stranded in the middle of the outback. That was in the 1930s.

Going further back, such actions were entirely common and accepted throughout Europe. I once did a research paper on a gentleman by the name of Gaston III, count of Foix, who was noted for such upstanding behaviour as imprisoning and ransoming his rivals for vast sums, Dueling and killing the man who replaced him in a royal appointment and killing his only legitimate son during an argument. This was in the 1300's in France.

So in answer to your comment, I think you'll find that most if not all societies have at some point seen such behaviour as commonplace. There are plenty of people in our wonderful enlightened Australia who think it's acceptable even now. Take the Murder trial currently underway in Sydney for example. Is it really so different?

wow this is full on

Big Ditto to that Dee-luded!!

My favourite player by miles.

Nothing that has happened today should cause any concern. Basil Jurrah had slight, albeit serious, injury to his scalp that required six stiches. Evidence so far presented affirms that he was struck repeatedly with a machete by Liam whilst his accomplice was pounding him with an axe.The defence will have a field day with that witness.

I will be much more interested in the doctor's report.There seems to be doubt as to whether the injury was actually caused by a machete. As Liam was found carrying a machete, I am aslo very interested in the forensic report on that machete, and whether or not it was used in the assault.

Stick the parochialism. The only thing that matters is the truth.

If he didnt do it, then i would welcome back Liam with open arms, and cheer him till i was blue in the face. If he did, i would never want him playing for us again.

I imagine the reaction from some of you would be very different if the alleged perpetrator were almost anyone else.

Stick the parochialism. The only thing that matters is the truth.

If he didnt do it, then i would welcome back Liam with open arms, and cheer him till i was blue in the face. If he did, i would never want him playing for us again.

I imagine the reaction from some of you would be very different if the alleged perpetrator were almost anyone else.

Disagree here.

I would think we would support ANY of our players in a situation relative to Liam's, and would grant them the same presumptions until proven otherwise.

Disagree here.

I would think we would support ANY of our players in a situation relative to Liam's, and would grant them the same presumptions until proven otherwise.

Actually I have to agree with Ding here. Not too long ago Col Sylvia was caught up with an alleged altercation with his girlfriend and the majority of people were ready to condem him.

If he'd been accused and brought up in front of court for serious assault charges I think most here would be wanting to sack him.

I'm happy for us to support him and I hope he is found to be innocent, but it will be a long wait over the three days to hear the result. And it will be equally interesting to see what happens at the end, regardless of the result.

Stick the parochialism. The only thing that matters is the truth.

If he didnt do it, then i would welcome back Liam with open arms, and cheer him till i was blue in the face. If he did, i would never want him playing for us again.

I imagine the reaction from some of you would be very different if the alleged perpetrator were almost anyone else.

How about if he's found guilty and didn't do it? How about if he's found not guilty but did? The fact is that this is a mess and I doubt we'll get to the truth, looking at the parties involved, the alcohol involved, the likely contrasting and conflicting versions of events!

Actually I have to agree with Ding here. Not too long ago Col Sylvia was caught up with an alleged altercation with his girlfriend and the majority of people were ready to condem him.

If he'd been accused and brought up in front of court for serious assault charges I think most here would be wanting to sack him.

I'm happy for us to support him and I hope he is found to be innocent, but it will be a long wait over the three days to hear the result. And it will be equally interesting to see what happens at the end, regardless of the result.

Why would we sack anyone for being accused of something?

Don't think you guys understand how the legal system works, it's innocent until proven guilty, and as we've found out via recent history, if you sack someone due to baseless accusations you will end up paying for it. It's called unfair dismissal, would you feel ok about it if you were fired from work for stealing when you hadn't done it?

Obviously you have and we bow to your greater knowledge in this area. Please eloborate,

What is your interest in this matter Sorge?

Do you follow Melbourne?

This is a football discussion site where the common interest in the fortunes or otherwise of the demons. Obviously froma perspective of human decency there is a sympathy by many to the plight of the other party involved.But my main interest in Liam's fate as he is a valuable asset to the future of my club.

Stick the parochialism. The only thing that matters is the truth.

If he didnt do it, then i would welcome back Liam with open arms, and cheer him till i was blue in the face. If he did, i would never want him playing for us again.

I imagine the reaction from some of you would be very different if the alleged perpetrator were almost anyone else.

I don't imagine it's quite as simple as that Ding.

That maybe your feelings, but we don't know how a young man venturing into a modern Western world, leaving his Clan behind, & trying to overcome injuries, clan issues, & Waring, & expectations from both the Clan & the Footy Club.

He is the Proverbial meat in the Sandwich.

Who knows how any of us would react in similar circumstances.

You just asked why the thread should be locked and this post would have to be Exhibit A as to why.

They are allegations, not facts, yet you write as though they have been proved and he has been convicted.

Not really, I stated at the end that he is only alleged to have done these things and made a comment on what I thought the repercussions should be if he is in fact found guilty of these allegations. If it was not Liam but someone unknown I would think the same thing. He is innocent until proven guilty, but if he (or anyone else for that matter) is found guilty of the allegations then they need to be held accountable under the law, just as any other citizen should be.

Well, how about our society a couple of hundred years ago? You have a problem with someone, you duel with pistols. Tom Cole writes in his book Hell West and Crooked how a farm hand stole several horses from him. Some time later he happened to see the man camped out with his horses. He walked into the camp, beat the hell out of him and left him stranded in the middle of the outback. That was in the 1930s.

Going further back, such actions were entirely common and accepted throughout Europe. I once did a research paper on a gentleman by the name of Gaston III, count of Foix, who was noted for such upstanding behaviour as imprisoning and ransoming his rivals for vast sums, Dueling and killing the man who replaced him in a royal appointment and killing his only legitimate son during an argument. This was in the 1300's in France.

So in answer to your comment, I think you'll find that most if not all societies have at some point seen such behaviour as commonplace. There are plenty of people in our wonderful enlightened Australia who think it's acceptable even now. Take the Murder trial currently underway in Sydney for example. Is it really so different?

I understand what you're saying - rather than "I can't envision a society where it is acceptable" I should have said I don't accept "culture" or "tradition" as excuses for this type of violence in the modern world. There are clearly extenuating circumstances and I know very little of the indigenous communities in Australia, but what has been alleged to have happened doesn't sound like tribal justice but rather alcohol fuelled revenge. There are other countries in the world where horrific human rights abuses are justified in the name of "culture" and "tradition". I don't accept that a persons culture or tradition gives them the right to stone a girl to death because she was raped and I don't accept a persons culture or tradition gives them the right to assault someone with a machete to the head in an act of "tribal justice". If you allow it for one you have to allow it for all and where does it stop? Should I be allowed to take justice in my own hands if a member of my family is sexually assaulted or attacked? As much as I would like to personally you can't let that happen in the modern world where we have a formal justice system that tries each person/case on their merits and gives them the right to be innocent until proven guilty, the same right those here are rightly demanding Liam is provided.

It is not a black and white situation and the imposition of a culture/tradition/morality on the indigenous peoples makes it an even more difficult subject but I don't think we can start allowing citizens to take justice into their own hands no matter who they are because once you do where does it stop?

Why would we sack anyone for being accused of something?

Don't think you guys understand how the legal system works, it's innocent until proven guilty, and as we've found out via recent history, if you sack someone due to baseless accusations you will end up paying for it. It's called unfair dismissal, would you feel ok about it if you were fired from work for stealing when you hadn't done it?

Andrew Lovett says hi

Andrew Lovett says hi

That was my example smarta$$...

Ruined career, contract paid out by St Kilda, all round mess. Bad for everyone. Was proven innocent.

That was my example smarta$$...

Ruined career, contract paid out by St Kilda, all round mess. Bad for everyone. Was proven innocent.

Yeh, just saying, it does happen. There's also a different burden of proof in an employment setting, so it would depend on what the club thinks in the circumstances (not referring to Jurrah, just more generally).

That was my example smarta$$...

Ruined career, contract paid out by St Kilda, all round mess. Bad for everyone. Was proven innocent.

Umm, not guilty is not equal to "proven innocent" (even if he was in fact) in the court system