- Joined
- May 25, 2013
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 0
Bit of a pickle this one - two trials and 5 years worth of law ending in nothing for anyone.
"During his first trial, Mr Lazarus testified he did not swear or raise his voice at Ms Mullins and he honestly believed that she was consenting.
In the second trial, Judge Robyn Tupman found that Mr Lazarus had no reasonable basis for believing Ms Mullins had not consented, but that Ms Mullins, in her own mind, had not consented.
"Whether or not she consented is but one matter. Whether or not the accused knew that she was not consenting is another matter," she said."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...lls-for-review-of-sexual-consent-laws/9734988
"During his first trial, Mr Lazarus testified he did not swear or raise his voice at Ms Mullins and he honestly believed that she was consenting.
In the second trial, Judge Robyn Tupman found that Mr Lazarus had no reasonable basis for believing Ms Mullins had not consented, but that Ms Mullins, in her own mind, had not consented.
"Whether or not she consented is but one matter. Whether or not the accused knew that she was not consenting is another matter," she said."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...lls-for-review-of-sexual-consent-laws/9734988