Brett Finch arrested.

Kurriboy

Kurriboy

Danny 'Bedsy' Buderus
Just reading Brett Finch has been arrested for alleged possession or transmission of child abuse material.

Police state that each man arrested, Finch was one of 8, all expressed desires to engage in sexual activity with children, and attempted to access material via a phone chat service.
 
THEY walk and breathe among us, Mr B Finch seemed to have enough drama in

his life before this......There's no chance of getting over this either way.....Joe.
 
Good grief … what a messed up individual. A very sad story all around, but it seems like the cops caught him before he could act on anything which is something at least.

I wonder if he was abused as a kid himself, I think those that do it often are? And would explain a lot with all the problems he’s had over the years.
 
jamesgould said:
Good grief … what a messed up individual. A very sad story all around, but it seems like the cops caught him before he could act on anything which is something at least.

I wonder if he was abused as a kid himself, I think those that do it often are? And would explain a lot with all the problems he’s had over the years.
Click to expand...
That’s right, but I remember in that podcast he literally said he had a great childhood and couldn’t blame his upbringing on his issues. That it was the loss of identity when he lost footy that got to him. He also said he didn’t like the type of rehab that tried to look deeper for a cause of addiction so maybe he was in denial about his past
 
That podcast must’ve just been a whole publicity stunt in order to get people to feel bad for him before all this surfaced.

Bloody vile.
 
Kickitoverhere said:
Pretty fried just watched an interview he did last week talking about when he hit rock bottom and how he’s working his way back. Guess it was all ******** and he’s just a sick twisted individual down to the bone.
Click to expand...
Yeah I watched this as well as I have my own struggles with mental health. I was so shocked and disgusted when I read the news.

I feel for all the non mainstream media that had given him a second chance but more importantly feel for whoever these men victimised.
 
It's a disturbing trend that police are now releasing all the evidence in cases to the press before people have had their day in court.
You'd think they'd only do this if they had a iron clad case, but it seems to be the opposite - they do it when they have a weak case in the hope new evidence will drop in their laps.
The most obvious case was the case against the foster parents of that boy, William Tyrell. They splashed all their suspicions all over the press and it's getting more and more obvious that they have nothing and are just hoping something will show up.

In short, Finch is innocent till proven guilty, and the fact that the police have dropped all the evidence they have in the press makes me think they have a weak case and are hoping something else will come to light if they put enough out there.
 
Billy said:
It's a disturbing trend that police are now releasing all the evidence in cases to the press before people have had their day in court.
You'd think they'd only do this if they had a iron clad case, but it seems to be the opposite - they do it when they have a weak case in the hope new evidence will drop in their laps.
The most obvious case was the case against the foster parents of that boy, William Tyrell. They splashed all their suspicions all over the press and it's getting more and more obvious that they have nothing and are just hoping something will show up.

In short, Finch is innocent till proven guilty, and the fact that the police have dropped all the evidence they have in the press makes me think they have a weak case and are hoping something else will come to light if they put enough out there.
Click to expand...
I agree in most but it seems finch isn’t a very smart bloke so was likely not using tor or encrypted services. He also got caught as part of a task force not just targeting him. soliciting child porn on a forum chat would surely be very easy to prove
 
Kickitoverhere said:
I agree in most but it seems finch isn’t a very smart bloke so was likely not using tor or encrypted services. He also got caught as part of a task force not just targeting him. soliciting child porn on a forum chat would surely be very easy to prove
Click to expand...
I agree innocent until proven guilty though. I obviously believe the claims but am willing to change my mind if he’s proven innocent.
I also agree it’s ****ed how the police seemingly conspire with the media to add pressure on an individual that should be illegal in my opinion.
 
Billy said:
It's a disturbing trend that police are now releasing all the evidence in cases to the press before people have had their day in court.
You'd think they'd only do this if they had a iron clad case, but it seems to be the opposite - they do it when they have a weak case in the hope new evidence will drop in their laps.
The most obvious case was the case against the foster parents of that boy, William Tyrell. They splashed all their suspicions all over the press and it's getting more and more obvious that they have nothing and are just hoping something will show up.

In short, Finch is innocent till proven guilty, and the fact that the police have dropped all the evidence they have in the press makes me think they have a weak case and are hoping something else will come to light if they put enough out
Click to expand...

yeah that is true and I’ll do my best to reserve judgement until his day in court comes.
 
I agree we shouldn't be making comments asserting guilt until he has been convicted.

It is disapointing that this stuff comes out in the press with all the details prior to the court hearing. I'm not even sure how that all happens whether it be through some sort of release protocol that they can't say no, or if it is released on purpose to generate more interest and therefore more leads!
 
The fact he is arrested sure, but official comments stating that each individual arrested expressed a desite to have sexual contact with a minor, or used a public chat forum communicate and attempt to access child abuse material is straight from the police.

Surely this stuff could be answered with the standard its an ongoing investigation/court case blerb.

I guess Billy's point about is that they volunteer plenty to put it out there where they may not need to. In some cases the person is innocent and that mud sticks.

No idea if Finch is or isn't innocent, but sureley muddying the accused through the press isn't required in the law process.
 
You understand that the press sit in court and hear the facts in a first mention. There was several persons arrested. One of them has probably had their bail refused and the prosecutions has touched on the bail objection which obviously has to included the facts and the strength of evidence against the defendants..

On high profile cases, besides it being in the public interest, there is a particular reason why certain information is given to the media, if you can’t figure out why they do this then you probably aren’t as smart as you think.
 
Also I personally can’t stand this “well let’s not judge till he’s had his day in court, he’s innocent till he’s proven guilty” etc etc etc patter. You’re kind of not actually saying anything at all, just like when people say “you’re entitled to your opinion”. Of course he’s gonna get his day in court, of course we can’t call him a confirmed sicko until he’s convicted. That’s how it works! So?

In fact it’s worse than that, because it’s not actually accurate. An acquittal or dismissal of charges does not, in fact, mean the person was “innocent”. It just means there wasn’t enough evidence to convict. A very important distinction.

I can’t crawl inside Finch’s head, but if his defence lawyers can think of a good reason for him to be in a group engaged in the dissemination of that material, I’d love to hear it. It’s really hard to imagine one.
 
HarVeeGee13 said:
Also I personally can’t stand this “well let’s not judge till he’s had his day in court, he’s innocent till he’s proven guilty” etc etc etc patter. You’re kind of not actually saying anything at all, just like when people say “you’re entitled to your opinion”. Of course he’s gonna get his day in court, of course we can’t call him a confirmed sicko until he’s convicted. That’s how it works! So?

In fact it’s worse than that, because it’s not actually accurate. An acquittal or dismissal of charges does not, in fact, mean the person was “innocent”. It just means there wasn’t enough evidence to convict. A very important distinction.

I can’t crawl inside Finch’s head, but if his defence lawyers can think of a good reason for him to be in a group engaged in the dissemination of that material, I’d love to hear it. It’s really hard to imagine one.
Click to expand...
The presumption of innocence is the fundamental human right that underpins western democratic societies.
We have had the right of a fair trial by our peers since King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, giving up the ultimate power of the Crown to trial by jury.
There are any number of examples in the world where tyranical governments hold shame trials and lock people up on a whim, and the right to defend yourself in a fair trial is what sets us apart from them.
In our adversarial system, the prosecution gets to make the strongest possible case against a person, and the defence gets to make the opposite case, and a jury gets to decide who is right. So far you have heard the case against him. He will not be officially guilty until he has had his chance to fairly put his side of the story to an unbiased group of his peers.

In short, if we don't have the presumption of innocence, we don't really have any rights.
 
I think you’ve missed my point lol. Point to where I said we should dispense with our entire legal system.

Thanks for the history lesson though.

Another key philosophical principle of our legal system is Blacktone’s ratio: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

It’s baked into the legal system that convicting someone of a crime should be extremely difficult, and the assumption is that many people who in reality are guilty of a crime will be acquitted (or charges will be dismissed). That’s the trade-off we accept in exchange for putting ourself at the mercy of the supreme power of the nation-state.

That’s why it’s foolish to think of it as a guilty/innocent binary. People get off the hook for things they 100% for sure did all the time, especially - just as a random example, not mentioning any names here - high profile athletes who can afford better lawyers than the women they rape.

The point of my initial post though is that there’s no reason for people just having a chat about something in the news to bind themselves to due process. We’re not the court of law here. If I say it’s messed up Finch was in that group, and it certainly looks a lot like he’s a pervert and a sicko, it doesn’t matter one bit. I’m not the judge or jury and neither are you.

And if his lawyer gets him out of it I’m not gonna say “oh well it’s all fine, he didn’t do anything, I’m happy to see him back on TV making stupid jokes with Matty Johns.” No he’ll be viewed with suspicion forever now, and I don’t think that’s unfair at all.
 
I can't jump on board with the they are guilty if convicted and guilty if not convicted just because the police couldn't get enough evidence.

Some people do get found not guilty even though they may have been guilty, some get convicted that were innocent.

But stating anybody charged with a crime is guilty just lol.

What a laughable position to take.

And there are laws around liable, i'm certainly no lawyer but other forums limit what people say or delete comments if assumption of guilt is implied for this reason. As all we know is Finch was arrested and the reasons the police say, it is being defended and we don't actually know anything more.

Yet assertions are made that Finch was in those forums as a definite!

Just saying, might want to be careful. We can't copy and past a news article but yet...
 
HarVeeGee13 said:
I think you’ve missed my point lol. Point to where I said we should dispense with our entire legal system.

Thanks for the history lesson though.

Another key philosophical principle of our legal system is Blacktone’s ratio: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

It’s baked into the legal system that convicting someone of a crime should be extremely difficult, and the assumption is that many people who in reality are guilty of a crime will be acquitted (or charges will be dismissed). That’s the trade-off we accept in exchange for putting ourself at the mercy of the supreme power of the nation-state.

That’s why it’s foolish to think of it as a guilty/innocent binary. People get off the hook for things they 100% for sure did all the time, especially - just as a random example, not mentioning any names here - high profile athletes who can afford better lawyers than the women they rape.

The point of my initial post though is that there’s no reason for people just having a chat about something in the news to bind themselves to due process. We’re not the court of law here. If I say it’s messed up Finch was in that group, and it certainly looks a lot like he’s a pervert and a sicko, it doesn’t matter one bit. I’m not the judge or jury and neither are you.

And if his lawyer gets him out of it I’m not gonna say “oh well it’s all fine, he didn’t do anything, I’m happy to see him back on TV making stupid jokes with Matty Johns.” No he’ll be viewed with suspicion forever now, and I don’t think that’s unfair at all.
Click to expand...
Not the way it works.
He is innocent till proven guilty, and if you want to say the opposite on a public forum, he could sue you and the forum if he wanted to - and if enough people declare him guilty before trial to a point where an unbiased jury can't be found, it's perfectly possible they could let him off because he can't get a fair trial.
You don't have the right to set yourself up as judge, jury and executioner - but you can pile on all you like if he is found guilty - and think what you like if he isn't, but not say it publicly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top