HERE'S WHAT RAY HADLEY SHOULD APOLOGISE FOR

Andrew Bolt

April 9, 2020

Ray Hadley should apologise for sliming me as "soft on pedophiles" when I defended George Pell. But he was weak and refused to let me on air to defend myself when he attacked me yet again. Here is exactly what he should apologise for, and what I think of his behaviour. Watch.

 

 

These are the comments for which I think Hadley should apologise. He accused me of being “soft on pedophiles” when I’d actually defended an innocent man.

This also shows Hadley is wrong to deflect the criticism by claiming in emails to listeners that I am a “liar” for saying his attack on me included accusations of “creepy behaviour” in defending people like Pell, as well as defending a headmaster who’d written a neutral character reference for a former teacher who’d groomed a student.

Note: Pell is the only person convicted of pedophilia I have ever defended, and the only one whose appeal was denied. Hadley is clearly referring to my defence of Pell.

Mr Bolt has a history of defending people with pedophilia. He has a history of it. Even when appeals are denied. He has a history of it. That’s on his conscience, not mine… You bloody well are. You are soft on paedophiles. And the only reason you’ve made an apology (to the student) is because you’ve been targeted by various social media groups for your creepy behaviour.

Ray is a coward for not apologising. He is a coward for not playing for his audience ALL the relevant comments. He is a coward for refusing to let me on air to defend myself or get a right of reply.

 

Source

 

Commentary by the Ottawa Mens Centre

Ray Hadley's cowardly attack on Andrew Bolt is an example of the red necked uneducated approach to the administration of justice.  Andrew Bolt in this case has defended George Pell who, the Australian High Court (AHC) have just acquitted.   

Readers need to understand that an "acquittal" by the AHC is the ultimate exoneration.   Andrew Bolt has extreme difficulty in explaining in plain english to his average reader exactly how and why George Pell was wrongfully convicted, and why a "fair trial" is important to democracy.   

 

The reason for that is that Andrew Bolt constantly seeks to undermine democracy by engaging in denial, deflection, conflation and outright fabrications of the news to support just one extreme conservative agenda.   


George Pell was convicted and his appeal denied based on a political decision disguised and called a legal decision because those judges were too afraid to make a politically unpopular legal decision.   

In a nutshell, the Rules of Evidence generally prohibit hearsay evidence and any exemption to that rule must pass tests of reliability and necessity which was not just impossible but all the evidence showed that the "evidence" of the hearsay witness was impossible and could not have occurred, which at the end of the day means, there was not just "reasonable doubt" requiring a not guilty verdict but there was also "no reasonable doubt as to his innocence".

 

Ottawa Mens Centre