ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Gable Tostee , murder cases , New Zealand cases

Reply
Old 11th October 2016, 10:00 PM   #121
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
There is a valid point to reminding he had made the "should throw you off the balcony" comment.
In light of that I might review my position.
It could be argued
1. She didn't know him
2. He had the strength to do it, so
3. She wouldn't wait to give him the opportunity.
4. In a drunken state climbing to the next level looked doable.

hmmm

I need to correct myself too. "Should" is a red herring introduced by me. Not intentionally.

Here is the quote from the audio.

Quote:
"You're lucky I haven't chucked you off my balcony you goddamn psycho little bitch," Mr Tostee said.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/quee...11-grzgwu.html

The same article explains how the prosecution are pursuing the charges.

Quote:
It is not alleged he threw or pushed Ms Wright but that he intimidated and threatened her so greatly she felt the only way to escape from him was to climb down from his balcony.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 11:00 PM   #122
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 466
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
OK. I'm still not seeing his innocence. I don't believe, going by the way the law is written, that the prosecution needs to prove that he had foresight of her impending death.
It follows from Section 23 (1)(b) of the Criminal code, which exculpates an accused from liability for the accidental outcome of their willed acts.

Quote:
An event occurs by accident within the meaning of section 23(1)(b) if it was a consequence which was not in fact intended or foreseen by the accused and would not reasonably have been foreseen by an ordinary person [...] Where the event in question is a death, the test has also been stated in these terms – ‘the test of criminal responsibility under section 23 is not whether the death is an ‘immediate and direct’ consequence of a willed act of the accused, but whether death was such an unlikely consequence of that act an ordinary person could not reasonably have foreseen it.’ It has also been expressed as ‘an ordinary person in the position of the accused would have foreseen the event as a possible outcome’
To find him guilty, the prosecution needs to prove the result of death could have been foreseen by the "reasonable man".

Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
She died. It is his fault that she died. This is indisputable in my opinion.
No, he is not at fault - see above. He has an out clause provided for in law. It's up to the prosecution to prove otherwise.

Quote:
There is no contention by the Crown that Tostee murdered Wright by pushing or throwing her off the balcony.

However, his culpability in her death is disputed.

The Crown has argued that the obvious fear in Wright's voice before she was locked on the balcony constitutes murder by virtue of the fact she was fleeing for her life when she fell.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news...ectid=11727301
Playing devils advocate here : if he put her out on the balcony, and then closed and locked the sliding door, you could argue she was no longer in any immediate danger, and "fleeing for her life" - there was a locked door between them. She could have yelled for help, or simply stayed put.

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 11th October 2016 at 11:21 PM.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 11:17 PM   #123
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
.
Playing devils advocate here : if he put her out on the balcony, and then closed and locked the sliding door, you could argue she was no longer in any immediate danger, and "fleeing for her life" - there was a locked door between them. She could have yelled for help, or simply stayed put.
All valid points. I'm not disputing any of your post. It will be an interesting outcome whichever way it goes.

On the quoted though. I've seen the scenario suggested, and it isnt hard to imagine ......
he stood there miming threats. Running a finger across his throat.
Went to a drawer and got a knife.

Etcetera. All things are imaginable. What can be proven, or swayed, in court is to be seen soon enough, I guess.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 11:46 PM   #124
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,779
I'm having $10 on him walking, which would be a sad result. Should get minimum 5-7 years for kidnapping/unlawful detention as a minimum.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 11:48 PM   #125
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,779
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
Playing devils advocate here : if he put her out on the balcony, and then closed and locked the sliding door, you could argue she was no longer in any immediate danger, and "fleeing for her life" - there was a locked door between them. She could have yelled for help, or simply stayed put.
I think you can make a case that having mentioned throwing her off the balcony, she feared for her life and that if she yelled out, he could come and throw her off anyway.

I'd buy that, but whether the jury does is another story.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 11:59 PM   #126
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 466
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
All valid points. I'm not disputing any of your post. It will be an interesting outcome whichever way it goes.
Absolutely, very interesting. My feeling is that he is a dangerous, narcissistic idiot who should have known better to lock a scared, drunk girl out on the balcony of a 14th floor apartment. Climbing down to the next floor wouldn't have been the first thing I would have thought of, but I wouldn't put anyone drunk out on a high balcony, simply because of the risk of falling. Surely that's common sense.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2016, 12:10 AM   #127
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I'm having $10 on him walking, which would be a sad result. Should get minimum 5-7 years for kidnapping/unlawful detention as a minimum.
And this is why I don't gamble. I want $5 each way.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2016, 07:05 AM   #128
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,635
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I don't. I see a wider problem, the families get branded wrongly if the state over eggs the misdeeds of one member. Is Tostee's old man to be considered when heaping murder one on his boy?
No.

What about the victim's family?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2016, 03:18 PM   #129
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Here's an article from 2014 that shows some of the character of Mr Tostee.

Quote:
A person posting, calling himself ‘G T’ and using a Facebook picture of Tostee, took to a bodybuilding site to deny causing New Zealander Warriena Tagpuno Wright to fall to her death.

The poster, active on the site since July 2004, has previously posted screenshots of explicit Tinder messages from an account that appears to be Mr Tostee’s.

The same poster also goes into graphic detail about previous sexual encounters, Tinder dates and his love of taking girls onto his Surfers Paradise balcony.
http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/...0b2805d8001dc1
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2016, 04:47 PM   #130
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
Here's an article from 2014 that shows some of the character of Mr Tostee.



http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/...0b2805d8001dc1
Character and prior history are relevant. This guy is a real piece of work. Much as Pistorius is.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2016, 08:23 PM   #131
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by Samson View Post

ETA no mention of a jury, must be judge only.
NB
Quote:
The 30-year-old displayed no emotion in the dock of the Brisbane Supreme Court on Monday, as the audio of him and Wright was played for the jury.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.

Last edited by Noztradamus; 12th October 2016 at 08:24 PM. Reason: Message lenghtened by 2 characters
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 12:08 AM   #132
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Yes, in New Zealand the report would be before judge x and a jury of 12

During a slow day, this is a useful balcony link

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...jectid=9002152

The Herald said his fall was witnessed by someone opposite Bastion’s Happy Valley apartment.
He described seeing a man climb out of the top-floor window, clamber along the ledge, slip, lose his footing and plunge six floors to his death.
Bastion was alone when it happened, having become "tense and uptight, paranoid even". Maureen had left him, taking the children back to Australia.
Immediately, rumours about the death of the flamboyant businessman started to fly. Was he murdered, did he kill himself over bad business decisions?
The Herald said the answer was much less dramatic - "Bastie" - (as he was known) fell out of the window while on drugs.


Atheist can enjoy this one. This is not exactly what happened, he was laundering money for Chinese (rather poorly in futures) as a side line, 300 million....

Last edited by Samson; 13th October 2016 at 12:55 AM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 02:19 AM   #133
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,635
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
Here's an article from 2014 that shows some of the character of Mr Tostee.

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/...0b2805d8001dc1
A lovely person. Maybe he'll be declared a "revolting slug" in parliament too.

BTW nice fox.

Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Character and prior history are relevant. This guy is a real piece of work. Much as Pistorius is.
Indeed.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 03:55 AM   #134
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Yes, in New Zealand the report would be before judge x and a jury of 12

During a slow day, this is a useful balcony link

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...jectid=9002152

The Herald said his fall was witnessed by someone opposite Bastionís Happy Valley apartment.
He described seeing a man climb out of the top-floor window, clamber along the ledge, slip, lose his footing and plunge six floors to his death.
Bastion was alone when it happened, having become "tense and uptight, paranoid even". Maureen had left him, taking the children back to Australia.
Immediately, rumours about the death of the flamboyant businessman started to fly. Was he murdered, did he kill himself over bad business decisions?
The Herald said the answer was much less dramatic - "Bastie" - (as he was known) fell out of the window while on drugs.


Atheist can enjoy this one. This is not exactly what happened, he was laundering money for Chinese (rather poorly in futures) as a side line, 300 million....
It's nothing like what happened, to the extent of being totally off topic.

I'm intrigued why you are so attracted to violent, privileged alpha males. The proven murderer OP being just one.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 04:13 AM   #135
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
It's nothing like what happened, to the extent of being totally off topic.

I'm intrigued why you are so attracted to violent, privileged alpha males. The proven murderer OP being just one.
Why do you say attracted?
I know what happened there, he was driven to his death by the Chinese Mafia. He was murdered in a direct way that did not happen in this case. It is on topic accordingly, an example of someone who was caught between a rock and a hard place. I knew him and people who knew him, and he was murdered.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 11:17 AM   #136
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 218
If the Jury are asked the question to consider the question by the Judge or prosecutor in closing 'why didn't he ring the police and tell them of the situation, also let her know that he'd asked them to come and sort it out' he's probably going to be found guilty. Equally, if he could close her out on the balcony, he could also close her out of the door, along with her belongings.

Last edited by Fixit; 13th October 2016 at 01:09 PM.
Fixit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 01:54 PM   #137
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 9,214
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
At last details emerge

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11726687

An explosive audio recording played in court that captured Warriena Wright's final hours in Gable Tostee's Gold Coast apartment has revealed the New Zealander was drunk, at times incomprehensible and repeatedly violent towards the man charged with her murder.

"I've met some weird people on Tinder," the 30-year-old murder accused is heard to say, as the drunk Wright apparently swings in and out of violent episodes towards him.

And

At one point, she accuses him of stealing her phone.

"Where's my ******* ****? My ******* data," she says.

Asked what it looks like, she yells, "it looks like a ******* iPhone".

Wright insists on leaving, but Tostee tries to stop her.

"I didn't say you have to leave, I just said stop beating me up," he said.

She asks him again where her things are.

"I will ******* destroy your jaw. It's not ******* funny," she says.

"Look, that's your stuff right there," he replies.

"Get it for me. Get it for me. Get it for me," she yells.

"I'm calling the police, get it for me. Get it for me now.


Then he locks her on the balcony, she tries to climb down, and falls.

How is this anything like murder when he figures a way to get her sober rather than have her cause him unknowable grief with the police?
And why would a jury be entitled to determine it?
I'm not familiar with the laws in Australia, but in most US states this would likely be what is known as "felony murder". If somebody commits a felony, and somebody else dies as a direct result, the person who committed the felon can be charged with murder.

While there are obviously a lot of details to be filled in, locking the woman on the balcony was inexcusable. If not murder, it certainly seems to be some variety of homicide.

Last edited by CORed; 13th October 2016 at 02:01 PM.
CORed is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 02:02 PM   #138
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
I'm not familiar with the laws in New Zealand, but in most US states this would likely be what is known as "felony murder". If somebody commits a felony, and somebody else dies as a direct result, the person who committed the felon can be charged with murder.

While there are obviously a lot of details to be filled in, locking the woman on the balcony was inexcusable. If not murder, it certainly seems to be some variety of homicide.
The case is in Australia, not New Zealand. There is no felony murder here. I think Tostee will be found guilty of murder as the Queensland law is written.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 11:47 PM   #139
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Quite shocked at the bigotry in the posts on this thread.

We are assumed "innocent until proven guilty" are we not? Here you are discussing how to frame murder on an innocent man.

Kidnapping? He restrained her on the ground after she physically and verbally assaulted him for an hour. She had struck him in the head with a metal object and had begun trashing his property.

I have ignored this case since it initially happened. I was not aware the recordings were available for such a long time.

So now it is at trial & the verdict will be soon.

I have listened to 40 minutes of the recordings and read a fair amount. Nothing suggests a murder or even warrants the manslaughter charge however I understand the due process of law must be followed.

Now my initial reaction when this happened in 2014 was the standard knee jerk reaction, evil nutter murdered a poor girl, rapist etc.

Lets establish the facts.

Tostee was popular with the ladies, a player. He has no record of sexual assault or indecency.

On the evening in question both parties agreed mutually to get drunk & have sex. The young lady was equally a party to this mutual sex between total strangers.

Both of them sounded drunk or very drunk on the recording.

Tostee seemed to be trying to be a gentleman throughout the evening all be it a drunken idiot. The young woman Warriena was clearly unable to handle the amount of alcohol she consumed and became beligerant.

It sounds like she assaulted tostee for at least an hour during which time he was self restrained & trying to be as polite as possible for a drunk having sex with a stranger. She also abused him verbally for at least an hour in her drunken state.

Warriena clearly had lost her self control, very drunk and became increasingly violent. At some point she began to trash the appartment, throwing objects at Tostee who himself even up to this point was non-threatening & non-violent.

She then grabbed a telescope stand and hit him in the head with it - it was at this time that Tostee tackled her to the ground and held her there while saying unpleasant things to her. It seems she was still holding the metal object at this stage.

Keep in mind she had begun to trash the apartment at this stage & could have smashed the glass door.

Tostee at no time struck her. The pathologist has also testified that she was not strangled.

He stuck her out on the balcony probably to cool her off. She became hysterical, tried to climb over the balcony and fell.

OK, what we have is a classic defensive knee jerk reaction. It is not even manslaughter. She assaulted him multiple times and was about to vandalise his property.

She was free to communicate with neighbours from the balcony & she was clearly a danger to herself unable to be escorted home.

What else was he to do? He did not hit her, he held her on the ground after she hit him in the head. He did not verbally abuse her throughout the evening. She did it to him.

If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me unless there is further evidence we have not been told.


As for male vs female predudice etc that is bigotry. This is a criminal case. It was clearly neither manslaughter nor murder & it was not kidnapping either. She was a danger to herself and others. The balcony was the best place for her to be had she not climbed off it.

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 13th October 2016 at 11:56 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 11:52 PM   #140
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Wild conjecture devoid of evidence. This large, strong guy could have easily put her out the front door and/or called the police. Instead he put on the balcony and threatened to throw her over.

Oh, and I'm not a member of the jury and can give my opinion based on the facts in front of me. I'm not bound by the "innocent before found guilty" legality.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2016, 11:59 PM   #141
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Quite shocked at the bigotry in the posts on this thread.

We are assumed "innocent until proven guilty" are we not? Here you are discussing how to frame murder on an innocent man.

Kidnapping? He restrained her on the ground after she physically and verbally assaulted him for an hour. She had struck him in the head with a metal object and had begun trashing his property.

I have ignored this case since it initially happened. I was not aware the recordings were available for such a long time.

So now it as at trial & the verdict will be soon.

I have listened to 40 minutes of the recordings and read a fair amount. Nothing suggests a murder or even warrants the manslaughter charge however I understand the due process of law must be followed.

Now my initial reaction when this happened in 2014 was the standard knee jerk reaction, evil nutter murdered a poor girl, rapist etc.

Lets establish the facts.

Tostee was popular with the ladies, a player. He has no record of sexual assault or indecency.

On the evening in question both parties agreed mutually to get drunk & have sex. The young lady was equally a party to this mutual sex between total strangers.

Both of them sounded drunk or very drunk on the recording.

Tostee seemed to be trying to be a gentleman throughout the evening all be it a drunken idiot. The young woman Warriena was clearly unable to handle the amount of alcohol she consumed and became beligerant.

It sounds like she assaulted tostee for at least an hour during which time he was self restrained & trying to be as polite as possible for a drunk having sex with a stranger. She also abused him verbally for at least an hour in her drunken state.

Warriena clearly had lost her self control, very drunk and became increasingly violent. At some point she began to trash the appartment, throwing objects at Tostee who himself even up to this point was non-threatening & non-violent.

She then grabbed a telescope stand and hit him in the head with it - it was at this time that Tostee tackled her to the ground and held her there while saying unpleasant things to her. It seems she was still holding the metal object at this stage.

Keep in mind she had begun to trash the apartment at this stage & could have smashed the glass door.

Tostee at no time struck her.

He stuck her out on the balcony probably to cool her off. She became hysterical, tried to climb over the balcony and fell.

OK, what we have is a classic defensive knee jerk reaction. It is not even manslaughter. She assaulted him multiple times and was about to vandalise his property.

She was free to communicate with neighbours from the balcony & she was clearly a danger to herself unable to be escorted home.

What else was he to do? He did not hit her, he held her on the ground after she hit him in the head. He did not verbally abuse her throughout the evening. She did it to him.

If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me unless there is further evidence we have not been told.


As for male vs female predudice etc that is bigotry. This is a criminal case. It was clearly neither manslaughter nor murder & it was not kidnapping either. She was a danger to herself and others. The balcony was the best place for her to be had she not climbed off it.
Welcome to the forum gareththomasnz, we discuss many NZ cases here too.

I generally agree, and most certainly that the scary "vertical fence" could be expected to keep her safe. Furthermore there are complicating factors, particularly his recent police record, which was driving, not violence to anyone. This would invoke regrettable caution in allowing her to storm down to the foyer and call the police.
However in law, and judging by views on the thread he looks sure to go down for manslaughter.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 12:21 AM   #142
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,477
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Quite shocked at the bigotry in the posts on this thread.

We are assumed "innocent until proven guilty" are we not? Here you are discussing how to frame murder on an innocent man.

Kidnapping? He restrained her on the ground after she physically and verbally assaulted him for an hour. She had struck him in the head with a metal object and had begun trashing his property.

I have ignored this case since it initially happened. I was not aware the recordings were available for such a long time.

So now it is at trial & the verdict will be soon.

I have listened to 40 minutes of the recordings and read a fair amount. Nothing suggests a murder or even warrants the manslaughter charge however I understand the due process of law must be followed.

Now my initial reaction when this happened in 2014 was the standard knee jerk reaction, evil nutter murdered a poor girl, rapist etc.

Lets establish the facts.

Tostee was popular with the ladies, a player. He has no record of sexual assault or indecency.

On the evening in question both parties agreed mutually to get drunk & have sex. The young lady was equally a party to this mutual sex between total strangers.

Both of them sounded drunk or very drunk on the recording.

Tostee seemed to be trying to be a gentleman throughout the evening all be it a drunken idiot. The young woman Warriena was clearly unable to handle the amount of alcohol she consumed and became beligerant.

It sounds like she assaulted tostee for at least an hour during which time he was self restrained & trying to be as polite as possible for a drunk having sex with a stranger. She also abused him verbally for at least an hour in her drunken state.

Warriena clearly had lost her self control, very drunk and became increasingly violent. At some point she began to trash the appartment, throwing objects at Tostee who himself even up to this point was non-threatening & non-violent.

She then grabbed a telescope stand and hit him in the head with it - it was at this time that Tostee tackled her to the ground and held her there while saying unpleasant things to her. It seems she was still holding the metal object at this stage.

Keep in mind she had begun to trash the apartment at this stage & could have smashed the glass door.

Tostee at no time struck her. The pathologist has also testified that she was not strangled.

He stuck her out on the balcony probably to cool her off. She became hysterical, tried to climb over the balcony and fell.

OK, what we have is a classic defensive knee jerk reaction. It is not even manslaughter. She assaulted him multiple times and was about to vandalise his property.

She was free to communicate with neighbours from the balcony & she was clearly a danger to herself unable to be escorted home.

What else was he to do? He did not hit her, he held her on the ground after she hit him in the head. He did not verbally abuse her throughout the evening. She did it to him.

If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me unless there is further evidence we have not been told.


As for male vs female predudice etc that is bigotry. This is a criminal case. It was clearly neither manslaughter nor murder & it was not kidnapping either. She was a danger to herself and others. The balcony was the best place for her to be had she not climbed off it.
In short. That doesn't matter.

Because, no matter what she did before that, he locked her up in an unsafe place. Unsafe, because she was very, very drunk. As a consequence of that locking up, she fell to her death.
That was because of his doing.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 12:26 AM   #143
Fixit
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 218
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Quite shocked at the bigotry in the posts on this thread.

We are assumed "innocent until proven guilty" are we not? Here you are discussing how to frame murder on an innocent man.

Kidnapping? He restrained her on the ground after she physically and verbally assaulted him for an hour. She had struck him in the head with a metal object and had begun trashing his property.

I have ignored this case since it initially happened. I was not aware the recordings were available for such a long time.

So now it is at trial & the verdict will be soon.

I have listened to 40 minutes of the recordings and read a fair amount. Nothing suggests a murder or even warrants the manslaughter charge however I understand the due process of law must be followed.

Now my initial reaction when this happened in 2014 was the standard knee jerk reaction, evil nutter murdered a poor girl, rapist etc.

Lets establish the facts.

Tostee was popular with the ladies, a player. He has no record of sexual assault or indecency.

On the evening in question both parties agreed mutually to get drunk & have sex. The young lady was equally a party to this mutual sex between total strangers.

Both of them sounded drunk or very drunk on the recording.

Tostee seemed to be trying to be a gentleman throughout the evening all be it a drunken idiot. The young woman Warriena was clearly unable to handle the amount of alcohol she consumed and became beligerant.

It sounds like she assaulted tostee for at least an hour during which time he was self restrained & trying to be as polite as possible for a drunk having sex with a stranger. She also abused him verbally for at least an hour in her drunken state.

Warriena clearly had lost her self control, very drunk and became increasingly violent. At some point she began to trash the appartment, throwing objects at Tostee who himself even up to this point was non-threatening & non-violent.

She then grabbed a telescope stand and hit him in the head with it - it was at this time that Tostee tackled her to the ground and held her there while saying unpleasant things to her. It seems she was still holding the metal object at this stage.

Keep in mind she had begun to trash the apartment at this stage & could have smashed the glass door.

Tostee at no time struck her. The pathologist has also testified that she was not strangled.

He stuck her out on the balcony probably to cool her off. She became hysterical, tried to climb over the balcony and fell.

OK, what we have is a classic defensive knee jerk reaction. It is not even manslaughter. She assaulted him multiple times and was about to vandalise his property.

She was free to communicate with neighbours from the balcony & she was clearly a danger to herself unable to be escorted home.

What else was he to do? He did not hit her, he held her on the ground after she hit him in the head. He did not verbally abuse her throughout the evening. She did it to him.

If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me unless there is further evidence we have not been told.


As for male vs female predudice etc that is bigotry. This is a criminal case. It was clearly neither manslaughter nor murder & it was not kidnapping either. She was a danger to herself and others. The balcony was the best place for her to be had she not climbed off it.
Greetings.

'What else was he to do?' you ask.

Let her leave or ring the police. Putting someone somewhere from where they can't leave is not only dubious, but downright dangerous if they are in a stressed state, suddenly they are powerless and don't know the other person's intentions. I believe she called out to be let go. I don't think he had the right to do what he did, restrain her in such a fashion when there were other alternatives. If it was poor judgement that needs to be explained by him (and I understand he is not going to give evidence which may prove fatal to his chances). Arguing that he was left with no other alternative is a dangerous risk if he is innocent, though I hope he pulls it off if that is the case. He's a big man and she appeared to be very small.
Fixit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 12:52 AM   #144
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Normally yes, but when that person has physically and verbally assaulted you for an hour, left you with bleeding welts, begun to damage your property and has possession of a blunt instrument that they have struck you with you restrain them & put them somewhere they can not further do you damage.

How do you know he was not planning to call the police?

I assume he intended to leave her there to sober up

Also a question to you - how much of the recording have you listed to?

I have listed to 40 minutes chronologically.

As this case was it could have been between two females, muliple people of either sex, two males. There is clear bias because it was a man and a woman.

Some time ago I had a friend that got drunk and the story police were told is that he fell from a chair & broke his neck. Now this guy was a scraper & the odds that this is what really happened are slim. There was no court case. Yet he was most probably killed wrestling in a fight.

Here because it is a female that screamed hysterically there is an assumption of guilt - that is wrong & it degrades the law and the civil rights we all have.

Warrena Wright had no right to assault Tostee or verbally abuse him. He at no time stuck her or behaved maliciously. Finally at the end his temper snapped and even then all he did was restrain her & put her out on the porch.

Honestly if you have not listened to as much of the recording as possible you should refrain from forming an opinion

I still have an open mind if there is incriminating content I have not heard in the full context.

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 14th October 2016 at 01:01 AM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:04 AM   #145
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Normally yes, but when that person has physically and verbally assaulted you for an hour, left you with bleeding welts, begun to damage your property and has possession of a blunt instrument that they have struck you with you restrain them & put them somewhere they can not further do you damage.

How do you know he was not planning to call the police?

I assume he intended to leave her there to sober up

Also a question to you - how much of the recording have you listed to?

I have listed to 40 minutes chronologically.

As this case was it could have been between two females, muliple people of either sex, two males. There is clear bias because it was a man and a woman.

Some time ago I had a friend that got drunk and the story police were told is that he fell from a chair & broke his neck. Now this guy was a scraper & the odds that this is what really happened are slim. There was no court case. Yet he was most probably killed wrestling in a fight.

Here because it is a female that screamed hysterically there is an assumption of guilt - that is wrong & it degrades the law and the civil rights we all have.

Warrena Wright had no right to assault Tostee or verbally abuse him. He at no time stuck her or behaved maliciously. Finally at the end his temper snapped and even then all he did was restrain her & put her out on the porch.

Honestly if you have not listened to as much of the recording as possible you should refrain from forming an opinion

I still have an open mind if there is incriminating content I have not heard in the full context.
Where is the evidence of these horrible assaults and grave injuries? Did you see the video of him going out to get a pizza shortly after this murder?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:13 AM   #146
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Where is the evidence of these horrible assaults and grave injuries? Did you see the video of him going out to get a pizza shortly after this murder?
Seriously, LK that pizza stuff is part of what screwed Knox. You know about this stuff.
This guy knew he was in deep trouble obviously albeit not that he had recorded the whole session for scrutiny. What should he do?

Maybe the recording saves him, else all the evidence is the screaming and the fall.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:21 AM   #147
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,989
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Seriously, LK that pizza stuff is part of what screwed Knox. You know about this stuff.
This guy knew he was in deep trouble obviously albeit not that he had recorded the whole session for scrutiny. What should he do?

Maybe the recording saves him, else all the evidence is the screaming and the fall.
What utter crap. And stop trying to derail this thread. This has nothing to do with Knox. At all.

Start posting sensibly.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:23 AM   #148
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Normally yes, but when that person has physically and verbally assaulted you for an hour, left you with bleeding welts, begun to damage your property and has possession of a blunt instrument that they have struck you with you restrain them & put them somewhere they can not further do you damage.
...hi Gable!

Was he incapable of making her leave the apartment? Was he physically unable to call the police? He didn't have the option of leaving the apartment and calling the police safely from outside? If he truly feared for his life as you seem to think, that was the logical option, was it not? It is what I would have done.

Quote:
How do you know he was not planning to call the police?
Because he didn't. "Intent" to call the police is not actually calling the police. He had an hour, did he not? Then after she fell, he went out and bought a pizza! He had time to leave the apartment, buy, then eat a pizza, then call his dad. And he still hadn't called the police.

I doubt he had any plans at all to call the police. Warriena Wright did, however, have plans to call the police. Can you remind everyone in the thread why she wasn't able to call the police again?

Quote:
I assume he intended to leave her there to sober up
And that would be a crime.

Quote:
Also a question to you - how much of the recording have you listed to?

I have listed to 40 minutes chronologically.
Why only 40 minutes?

Quote:
As this case was it could have been between two females, muliple people of either sex, two males. There is clear bias because it was a man and a woman.
And you've got no comparative case to make this claim. I don't believe this to be true.

Quote:
Some time ago I had a friend that got drunk and the story police were told is that he fell from a chair & broke his neck. Now this guy was a scraper & the odds that this is what really happened are slim. There was no court case. Yet he was most probably killed wrestling in a fight.
Who gives a **** about one of your personal anecdotes? I've got a hundred of them. None of them are relevant to this case.

Quote:
Here because it is a female that screamed hysterically there is an assumption of guilt - that is wrong & it degrades the law and the civil rights we all have.
If I decide that someone is guilty of a crime that does not degrade the law or someone's civil rights at all. We don't have thought police here in NZ and they don't have it in Australia. Taking away my right to believe in guilt or innocence would be degrading my civil rights. Is that what you want to do?

Quote:
Warrena Wright had no right to assault Tostee or verbally abuse him. He at no time stuck her or behaved maliciously. Finally at the end his temper snapped and even then all he did was restrain her & put her out on the porch.
Gable Tostee had no right to detain Warrena Wright. None at all. He had the option of calling police: but as you state for an hour he chose not too. He could have put her outside the door. But he chose not too. The decisions that he made are why he is now in court.

Quote:
Honestly if you have not listened to as much of the recording as possible you should refrain from forming an opinion
Honestly: why do you think that 40 minutes is "as much as possible?" Surely you can do better than that!

Quote:
I still have an open mind if there is incriminating content I have not heard in the full context.
It doesn't look very open to me.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:29 AM   #149
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
What utter crap. And stop trying to derail this thread. This has nothing to do with Knox. At all.

Start posting sensibly.
You know full well that it is legendary how people behave in unexpected ways after unexpected real life catastrophic events, so no derail when the analogy is specific. Pizza and pizza.
Have you listened to the 40 minutes referred to?
I haven't but it sounds what I expect, chaos emerging from trivial and mundane input.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:34 AM   #150
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Seriously, LK that pizza stuff is part of what screwed Knox. You know about this stuff.
...here's an interesting thought. Every day, all around the world, there are thousands of legal cases being prosecuted. In many of them the defendant will get a fair trial. They will have competent defenders, and the prosecution will have gathered their evidence in a fair and proper manner. But there will be cases where the defense is incompetent, or where the police planted evidence, or where the prosecutors hold back evidence that they should have disclosed.

Do you know what those thousands of cases have in common with the Amanda Knox case? They have absolutely nothing to do with this case.

If you want to talk about Amanda Knox, then there is a thread about that case. You might know about it. But if you want to talk about it in this thread? Then it has to be relevant. And "pizza" is hardly a common thread. Pizza just happens to be what Gable chose to eat when he walked out of his apartment complex. He may have chosen burgers. And if he did choose burgers, would you still think there is a connection to the Knox case?

Quote:
This guy knew he was in deep trouble obviously albeit not that he had recorded the whole session for scrutiny. What should he do?
Call the freaking police.

Quote:
Maybe the recording saves him, else all the evidence is the screaming and the fall.
The recording should convict him. Because it was clear that he had plenty of options. He just chose the worst possible options he could have.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:45 AM   #151
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
...here's an interesting thought. Every day, all around the world, there are thousands of legal cases being prosecuted. In many of them the defendant will get a fair trial. They will have competent defenders, and the prosecution will have gathered their evidence in a fair and proper manner. But there will be cases where the defense is incompetent, or where the police planted evidence, or where the prosecutors hold back evidence that they should have disclosed.

Do you know what those thousands of cases have in common with the Amanda Knox case? They have absolutely nothing to do with this case.

If you want to talk about Amanda Knox, then there is a thread about that case. You might know about it. But if you want to talk about it in this thread? Then it has to be relevant. And "pizza" is hardly a common thread. Pizza just happens to be what Gable chose to eat when he walked out of his apartment complex. He may have chosen burgers. And if he did choose burgers, would you still think there is a connection to the Knox case?



Call the freaking police.



The recording should convict him. Because it was clear that he had plenty of options. He just chose the worst possible options he could have.
The pizza is redolent of the infamous quote of Knox, I'd kill for a pizza.
Absolutely irrelevant in the context of a recent event, just as Tostee wandering in a daze and eating pizza is in the context of the catastrophe he was nailed to.
There is a serious refusal to imagine a chain of events that leads to varied outcomes that commonly never come to the attention of anyone.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:49 AM   #152
Ben1985
New Blood
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 23
Agree mostly with gareththomasnz

If you read the full transcript of the recording (which has been publicly available for over two years):

Wright become highly intoxicated.
She faked losing her phone and accused Tostee of stealing it before revealing she had it on her person the entire time.
Later she started to become violent and began throwing rocks at Tostee.
He then repeatedly and increasingly angrily asked her to leave (this was when he said "you're lucky I haven't chucked you off the balcony).
She stayed.
He then tried to physically throw her out (this is when he said "You're not taking any of your things, I'm throwing you out just as you are")
She grabbed a telescope and hit him with it.
He then pinned her to the floor and forced her to drop it.
He threw her onto the balcony, accused her of trying to kill him and said he had proof (the recording).
She begged him to let her go and she refused ("I would but you've been a bad girl")
He then locked the door, she screamed and then silence.

I understand the cops are relying on a precedent where a woman jumped out her 9th story window when her husband came at her with a knife. This case is very different though. By locking her out on they balcony Tostee removed any immediate threat of harm

All up, it seems more like he was threatening to press charges than to kill her. His actions in locking her on the balcony where definitely vindictive and malicious, but it's fairly clear that he never intended her physical harm imo.

Now you could argue that leaving a drunk, frightened and unbalanced young woman on the balcony was reckless/criminally negligent. Manslaughter maybe, but definitely not murder imo.

The judge that granted him bail said as much when she stated that the case for a murder charge was not strong and that manslaughter might be more appropriate.
Ben1985 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 01:54 AM   #153
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The pizza is redolent of the infamous quote of Knox, I'd kill for a pizza.
...that quote is so infamous, that googling it: brings up absolutely NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT AMANDA KNOX.

I mean, WTF? I added the term "Knox" to the google search and all I got were the "paranoid obsessive" internet forums where people have devoted their lives to this particular case appear to dwell, but that was it.

This quote isn't "infamous" at all. It didn't even give me more than 10 results on google. It is only "infamous" to people following the case. No one else on the planet has a clue as to what you are talking about. So why on earth do you think its relevant to this case?

Quote:
Absolutely irrelevant in the context of a recent event, just as Tostee wandering in a daze is in the context of the catastrophe he was nailed to.
Yes: its irrelevant to this case. So why did you bring it up?

Quote:
There is a serious refusal to imagine a chain of events that leads to varied outcomes that commonly never come to the attention of anyone.
There isn't a refusal at all. What happened here was obviously the result of a chain of very bad decisions. But just because Gable may regret the decisions he made that day, that doesn't excuse him from the decisions he made that day.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:04 AM   #154
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
...that quote is so infamous, that googling it: brings up absolutely NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT AMANDA KNOX.

I mean, WTF? I added the term "Knox" to the google search and all I got were the "paranoid obsessive" internet forums where people have devoted their lives to this particular case appear to dwell, but that was it.

This quote isn't "infamous" at all. It didn't even give me more than 10 results on google. It is only "infamous" to people following the case. No one else on the planet has a clue as to what you are talking about. So why on earth do you think its relevant to this case?



Yes: its irrelevant to this case. So why did you bring it up?



There isn't a refusal at all. What happened here was obviously the result of a chain of very bad decisions. But just because Gable may regret the decisions he made that day, that doesn't excuse him from the decisions he made that day.
You missed then lionking's post where he talked about pizza, he also was prolific on Knox threads.
The theme is
1. There has been a death, and certain actions are ok
2. But not eating pizza.
We now have two posters better informed than the rest of us because they are bringing detail.
Unless your plan is to describe the whole 3 hour tape.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:10 AM   #155
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,635
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Quite shocked at the bigotry in the posts on this thread.
Really?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
We are assumed "innocent until proven guilty" are we not? Here you are discussing how to frame murder on an innocent man.
No we're not.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Kidnapping? He restrained her on the ground after she physically and verbally assaulted him for an hour. She had struck him in the head with a metal object and had begun trashing his property.
Why didn't be call the police? He forcibly and unlawfully imprisoned her.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
So now it is at trial & the verdict will be soon.
Indeed.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Tostee was popular with the ladies, a player. He has no record of sexual assault or indecency.
Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
On the evening in question both parties agreed mutually to get drunk & have sex. The young lady was equally a party to this mutual sex between total strangers.
Also irrelevant. Also consent may be withdrawn at any time.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Both of them sounded drunk or very drunk on the recording.
Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Tostee seemed to be trying to be a gentleman throughout the evening all be it a drunken idiot.


Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
The young woman Warriena was clearly unable to handle the amount of alcohol she consumed and became beligerant.
Then Tostee should have ejected her, called the police or medical services.
He didn't.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Warriena clearly had lost her self control, very drunk and became increasingly violent. At some point she began to trash the appartment, throwing objects at Tostee who himself even up to this point was non-threatening & non-violent.
That is not "clear" at all.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
He stuck her out on the balcony probably to cool her off. She became hysterical, tried to climb over the balcony and fell.
His actions led to her death. He had other options, like ejecting her, which he didn't take. Why?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
OK, what we have is a classic defensive knee jerk reaction. It is not even manslaughter.


Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
She was free to communicate with neighbours from the balcony & she was clearly a danger to herself unable to be escorted home.
Why weren't the police called?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
What else was he to do?
Call the police and/or medical services.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
As for male vs female predudice etc that is bigotry.


Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
This is a criminal case. It was clearly neither manslaughter nor murder & it was not kidnapping either. She was a danger to herself and others. The balcony was the best place for her to be had she not climbed off it.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:12 AM   #156
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,635
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Wild conjecture devoid of evidence. This large, strong guy could have easily put her out the front door and/or called the police. Instead he put on the balcony and threatened to throw her over.

Oh, and I'm not a member of the jury and can give my opinion based on the facts in front of me. I'm not bound by the "innocent before found guilty" legality.
And this is the interesting part. Even if Tostee didn't call the police why not just eject her?
Give gareththomasnz's rampant speculation here some of mine; he planned to have sex with her, in her intoxicated state.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:14 AM   #157
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,635
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Normally yes, but when that person has physically and verbally assaulted you for an hour, left you with bleeding welts, begun to damage your property and has possession of a blunt instrument that they have struck you with you restrain them & put them somewhere they can not further do you damage.
He could have called the police.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
How do you know he was not planning to call the police?
He had opportunity yet he didn't.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
I assume he intended to leave her there to sober up


Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
There is clear bias because it was a man and a woman.
Evidence?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Here because it is a female that screamed hysterically there is an assumption of guilt - that is wrong & it degrades the law and the civil rights we all have.
A dead female. The bias simply drips from your posts.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:20 AM   #158
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
You missed then lionking's post where he talked about pizza, he also was prolific on Knox threads.
...I saw him talk about pizza.

I talked about pizza.

What if it had been burgers? Would it then be relevant to the Knox case?

lionking's participation in the Knox thread is irrelevant. I've participated in the Knox threads as well.

Quote:
The theme is
This is a discussion forum. We don't have "themes."

Quote:
1. There has been a death, and certain actions are ok
2. But not eating pizza.
Well, eating pizza most certainly was not an "okay" action. When you illegally detain someone, then that person falls to their death off of your balcony, YOU DON'T GO BUY PIZZA. You call the police. You call an ambulance. You try and get help. You don't shrug your shoulders and go get a feed.

Well you can go and get a feed if you like. Just don't be surprised if you later then get arrested and charged for murder.

Quote:
We now have two posters better informed than the rest of us because they are bringing detail.
These two posters coincidentally not only bring up identical points, they are both brand new to the forums! A big welcome is in order. Welcome to the forums you two!

Now: neither of them bought any cites. So until they do: they are just people saying things on a messageboard. I don't know where you are getting they are "better informed than the rest of us." Why do you think that?

Quote:
Unless your plan is to describe the whole 3 hour tape.
You truly are the "king of the non-sequitur." WTF is this sentence all about?
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:24 AM   #159
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,625
Banquet bear,
I have not listened to the whole tape, it is three hours, that is what that is about. I have listened to very little, but the new posters are informed. That is good, and they should be applauded for that.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2016, 02:50 AM   #160
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,559
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Banquet bear,
I have not listened to the whole tape, it is three hours, that is what that is about. I have listened to very little, but the new posters are informed. That is good, and they should be applauded for that.
...but what about the burgers? You haven't answered my question about the burgers yet.

Just because they allegedly "listened to the tape" that doesn't mean they are relaying what they heard accurately, and it doesn't mean they are "better informed." There isn't anything they have said that anyone following along on the case doesn't already know. They haven't bought anything new to the table except for a "different perspective."

Tostee knows he is recording the conversation. And it is entirely within the realms of possibility he is saying things for the recording. But that is for the jury to decide.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:24 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.