You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘news’ tag.

Last night I turned on the television to discover there was no Chaser! “WHAT IS THIS?” I exclaimed, outraged.
And then my sister informed me that it was not just cancelled this week, but also next!

HOW COULD YOU ABC? How could you, my favourie channel, deprive me of my favourite television programme for not just one week, but two?!?! And when I’d been so excited about their return to television only two weeks ago!

Now, if you’ve been living under a rock, you probably wouldn’t know about the big controversy over a skit the Chaser performed in their second episode in this EPIC series return to my absolute best and favourite television station!

Photobucket
fig 1: Georgia’s heros

The skit was a parody of the Make A Wish foundation, in which they referred to the charity as the “Make A Realistic Wish Foundation” and they sang a little song about how it wasn’t worth putting in alot of effort into making sick kid’s wishes come true, because they were going to die anyways. (If you haven’t seen it, I’m sure you can find it SOMEWHERE on YouTube, but it has been removed from the Chaser’s website.)

Now, there’s no doubt that the skit was in rather bad taste, and the Chaser has taken full responsibility, apologised and suggested everyone offended make a donation to the Make A Wish foundation. But really, isn’t that what we’ve come to expect from this amazing troop of soldiers?

So, did the ABC have to CANCEL the show for two weeks? Honestly, the Chaser has offended a million times before, made a million apologies and their criminal records put Voldemort to shame! They’re not going to STOP just because you pull them off the air for a few weeks! Hell, you could pull them off the air permanently, and they’d find a way to secretly broadcast themselves to the world!

So why make me suffer for two weeks without them? They are still going to offend, it’s what they do! They WANT to offend you, and the more you’re offended, the more ammunition you give them.
And by stirring up the public, they create debate, discussion and provide a public service by performing scrutiny upon all political and public sectors of society to “keep the bastards honest”, because seriously, the Democrats aren’t exactly doing much in that realm now days!

And sure, the Chaser may be doing it in the most offensive and vulgar way possible, but that’s because they were jaded law and political science students, much like myself, and I have long dreamed of joining forces with them one day in the future, in order to do my duty for my nation by making a public nuisance of myself, annoying the SHIT out of the pollies and earning myself a sweet-deal criminal record in the process. Because there is really no doubt that what they do is as fun as it looks on the telly!

But, all I really wanted to say was this: you can whinge and complain and rant about the Chaser all you want, but they are a force that are tough to beat. A force that will one day be invinsible! (When I join them.)

Until such a time,
xoxo
Georgia

p.s. geez KRudd, you’re no fun! We want a PM with a sense of humour! Or atleast one that’s fun to hate. We were so lucky to have someone who provided as much amusement as little Johnny, why can’t you be more like him? Huh, KRudd, huh? And don’t you dare try to use that $900 you just deposited into my bank account as some sort of bribe to get me to lighten up on you! BE MORE FUN!

The ABC news site has coverage on the case I covered in my last post.

The story: Man charged over sexual assault of Perth prostitute is obviously going to be one we’re sure to see alot of in the coming weeks – especially when it goes to trial at the end of the month.

I will keep a close eye on the ABC website, the evening news and the newspapers when I get them (Wednesday, Saturday, Sunday). If you see anything on the case that it is likely I have missed – please leave a comment with the source.

Expect more soon!

xoxo

p.s. I got my History assignment back. 71%! Can you believe that? Seriously man, it was not worth 71%. I am thrilled. ^_^

p.p.s. I am now getting 67 cents to the USA dollar. Man, I told my parents that the economy was going to crash. I told them this in the lead up to the Australian Federal Election last year. They told me to shush, I wasn’t an economics expert and nothing of the sort would happen! I should’ve converted my cash to US dollars and pounds and euros last year

I like watching the news. Even the bogus news like A Current Affair and Today Tonight.
Obviously the news tells us everything we need to know, like whats happening in politics, finance, weather, sport and is Lindsay Lohan really a lesbian or just desperate for attention? All the most important and hard hitting questions and answers that will be crucial to my everyday decisions – will I really truly like the taste of girls cherry chapstick if I kiss her?

But tonights hard hitting question: can you rape a consenting prostitute?

Remember, consent can be withdrawn at any time – and can turn into rape. So for the sake of this, we must understand that, as far as the facts go, at no time during the act, did the prostitute withdraw her consent.

So now, let us consider the facts of this trial currently being heard in the Perth Magistrates Court:

A man (We shall call him D, for defendant) went into a brothel or similar and hired the services of a prostitute (V, as in victim) to do well… what prostitutes do.

D wrote V a cheque for her services. Later on, V went to cash the cheque and it bounced.

Apparently this occurred twice. (Atleast that’s what I think the voice over lady said…)

The procecution (P, for prosecution), who are representing V, are claiming that D was fully aware that he did not have the funds to pay for V’s services and that he knew the cheque would bounce.

D has now been charged with rape and potentially fraud.

I think I’ll get a better look at the facts before I go making my opinions known.
At this stage I think the outcome will be based very much on whether or not D is proved to have known that his cheque would bounce. If he can successfully prove he honestly and reasonably thought that his cheque was valid and would process, then he might have a defence under section 23 of the Criminal Code which covers Mistake of Fact – at which point he might get off.

I will be watching this case very closely. Very influential precedent could arise from this.

I’ll keep you posted!

xoxo

EDIT: I just wanted to clarify that the term ‘rape’ isn’t actually used in the WA Criminal Code. The terminology used is infact “sexual penetration without consent”. And there are cases that will no doubt be considered by the courts. If you’re interested, check out the cases of Ibbs (WA) from 1987 and Papadimitropoulos (sp?) (Vic – a High Court decision). Last semester my Criminal Law lecturer put the question to us: “If A agrees to pay a fee for prostitute V’s sexual services and then runs off without paying, is this rape?” There was no answer, and as far as I know, no specific precedent for it. As I said, this is going to be important.