Lawyers abandon the law on Christian Porter. By Janet Albrechtsen.
It is entirely predictable that many journalists, with no grounding in the law, would take part in the public shaming of Christian Porter. For them, and others, this is corrective “justice” for the many women who have quietly suffered from discrimination, sexual harassment and rape.
However, the warm-up act to their demand for the independent inquiry has trashed not just sound journalism, but also our democracy. Their public show trial relies on a skewed version of alleged events that is plainly incomplete and ignores fundamental legal principles such as the presumption of innocence and rule of law. …
That we have courts and a legal system established over centuries to avoid sham trials makes no difference to sanctimonious journalists. …
This mob includes many ABC journalists who, in their overzealous commentary, failed to report the woman’s long and sad history of mental illness, or her several suicide attempts, or that police did not pursue an investigation due to lack of evidence and the woman’s statement that she did not wish to pursue her claims citing medical and personal issues. …
Journalists failing to understand basic legal principles is bad enough. It is far worse when lawyers favour a flawed ad hoc inquiry. Described in a news report as “top lawyers”, barristers Jane Needham SC and Larissa Andelman and past president of the Law Council of Australia, Pauline Wright, also said there should be an independent inquiry. Needham said “an inquiry would allow for all sides to be heard”. How so? The woman is dead.
If “top” lawyers back an inherently flawed inquiry, why wouldn’t others turn their backs on the legal system as the proper means to determine guilt or innocence? Witness the frightful mess at law firm MinterEllison last week when chief executive Annette Kimmitt emailed 2500 staff expressing her displeasure that a senior partner is acting for Christian Porter. In her email, Kimmitt said the matter “has certainly triggered hurt for me. I know that for many of you it may be a tough day and I want to apologise for the pain you may be experiencing”. …
We are witnessing the high cost of law firms going woke.
Woke justice and mob rule, so hard to distinguish.
Kept in line by the fears of social ostracism and professional death, the upper class marches in lock step on politicized issues — no matter that the cost. Justice be damned.
And fairness be damned. What possible “principle” could the woke mob be following that allows persecution of Christian Porter while excusing Bill Shorten? The cases are almost identical.
It couldn’t be clearer. Join the left mob or risk its wrath.
