NSW Charged for Shoplifting Months Later?

[Rod]

Note: I am not affiliated with law answers in anyway, and I have disagreed with Tim on occasion, sometimes right, sometimes wrong.

Tim's response in my view was not appropriate and should have been worded differently, but by the same token, in my view didn't cross the line requiring sanction.

The poster's reply to Tim well and truly crossed the line and was appropriately sanctioned.

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

@Davidgreat: I can't directly answer your question as I don't make the decisions on this site. So, while my post doesn't specifically answer your question I'm not in a position to be able to do so. If you read my post carefully you'll see that I've given some insight into the possibility of why Jermy got the response he did.

As much as this is a public site, it's run and owned privately. And as with a lot of sites I can see that it is run in a manner to allow robust debate and 'freedom of speech' - within set boundaries. I would hazard to guess that largely the site is reliant on certain 'talent' to fuel its purposes - and I say that being totally self-aware. A bunch of unqualified people having a stab in the dark at other people's legal problems isn't going to get very far. Now, whether it's me or anyone else, that talent is going to get a degree of latitude which is probably commensurate with how useful they are. Everyone will have their limits and I suspect they have some individuality to them.

I can't speak for anyone else, but no one is paying me to be here. In fact, it's the opposite. I pay money to be a verified poster here as part of a listing package through LawTap. I consider this aspect of it to be part of my 'pro bono' output. It's good mental exercise and has gotten me a few referrals but my time here is overwhelmingly charitable.

I may also have more patience than most (sometimes) but I'm giving up my time to be helpful around here. If someone wants to argue with something that is clearly answered, I'm not going to sugarcoat my further responses and waste my time. I'm not here to argue: I get enough of that to keep me occupied.

 

[DavidI]

To Rod and Rob,
I am not arguing here but want to raise a point that Tim W initiated the attack and did that to other posters. I agree that Jermy used negative language but it was a response to Tim W. Just disagree or agree with anyone is not enough, If this was Tim W first time, then a second chance would OK. He did that times and without any reason.Is this fair? Where are the owners of this site to review Tim W posting. Their work is appreciated and acknowledged but Tim has raised several attacks, so it should be reviewed. If he is a lawyer that does not mean he is a God!

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

Alright, you're clearly overreacting. For you to join this forum two days ago, just happen on this thread, and decide you know enough about the myriad of threads a specific poster has commented on to be able to denounce that person, is so remote as to be all but practically impossible. I frankly don't believe that anyone would join and immediately start banging away like you have - on the very day you joined the forum, no less.

I may, of course, be wrong and you may simply be a good Samaritan wanting to stick up for someone else. But I'm a cynical lawyer. We don't trust such things blindly. On the other hand I'm also not a betting man, and I don't care either way.

Take a leaf out of your own book. If you are "pissed off at what the other poster [is saying, you] can turn off [your] system ... and not read anything, no one [forced you to read his posts]".

 

[DavidI]

Alright, you're clearly overreacting. For you to join this forum two days ago, just happen on this thread, and decide you know enough about the myriad of threads a specific poster has commented on to be able to denounce that person, is so remote as to be all but practically impossible. I frankly don't believe that anyone would join and immediately start banging away like you have - on the very day you joined the forum, no less.

I may, of course, be wrong and you may simply be a good Samaritan wanting to stick up for someone else. But I'm a cynical lawyer. We don't trust such things blindly. On the other hand I'm also not a betting man, and I don't care either way.

Take a leaf out of your own book. If you are "pissed off at what the other poster [is saying, you] can turn off [your] system ... and not read anything, no one [forced you to read his posts]".

You are biased to Tim W, why are you defending him? why put all that effort? you can easily go to anyone's profile page and read all their posts and if you do to Tim W, you will see he attacked others for no reason at all! Even I just joined in, but I do read on this forum from long time ago, but never needed to use it until now. Up to now, I did not get the answer to my question: why is Tim W still being able to post here and attack people without banning? if Tim W initiates the attacks, shouldn't he be held responsible for it? I did read a lot of comments which I did not like, but I never attacked the poster. No need. Until now, it just pissed me off. that is the reason why I am writing, I want to know why there is nothing done towards Tim W? that is all I am asking and till now no one is answering.

I do admit this site is good and helpful and many benefit from it, as I do by reading some posts here, but I still believe that something needs to be done to Tim W. He is just not worth it.

 

[lawanswers]

Locking thread. Please continue to be civil with each other. Thank you.