The Evidentiary Trail
Creampuff, et al,
I have been lurking seeking academic and rigorous debate on the Senate Inquiry and the possible censure of CASA. I againt went through the earlier posts on this thread this evening and came to the view that regular contributors were drooling with anticipation that CASA was heading for the final high jump. What comes after that no one said!
All I see on this thread is bs and bluster with some of the regulars saying that if they had of written the submission it would have said the same thing or contributors like Mach_1 who by his/her performance uses innuendo and tries to present it as evidence.
Where is the robust debate (except for the legal eagle wank earlier in the post about historical and irrelevant points) based on the rules of evidence.
I think Father O'Flaherty has a case to answer, he likes little girls so by inference Father O'Flaherty is a paedophile. Alternatively he could just be a compassionate human being? I am seeing too much the latter in this discussion.
Bill Hamilton often says things that are worth thinking about. So does Ronald McDonald!
Bartender, another mint julep if you please!!!