• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gable Tostee

lionking said:
A coroner's inquest was always going to happen. At the very least Tostee will face an enormous civil suit.
Click to expand...

lionking said:
Comments GlenCashQC?
Click to expand...

Groan.... Ive already covered it here (see point 3)

S27 of the Coroners Act states when an inquest must be held

(1) The coroner investigating a death must hold an inquest if—
(a) the coroner considers the death is—
(i) a death in custody; or
(ii) a death in care, in circumstances that raise issues about the deceased person’s care; or
(iii) a death mentioned in section 8(3)(h) that is not also a death in custody, unless the coroner is satisfied the circumstances of the death do not require the holding of an inquest; or
(b) the Attorney-General directs the State Coroner to arrange for an inquest to be held into the death; or
(c) the State Coroner, on the State Coroner’s own initiative or on an application under section 30, orders an inquest be held into the death; or
(d) the District Court, on an application under section 30, orders an inquest be held into the death.

IF the coroner raises an inquest it will only be via 27 (1)(c), and why would he when the trial has made clear the actions of that night? The coroner is not a psychologist; he is not interested in determining what was going on in Miss Numpty's mind when she decided to climb over - she just went of her own accord and that is sufficient to satisfy the reason for death on the certificate. CASE CLOSED. Then I'll stop getting these stupid Google news alerts about this case finally! Sheesh!
 
GlennCashQC said:
Groan.... Ive already covered it here (see point 3)

S27 of the Coroners Act states when an inquest must be held

(1) The coroner investigating a death must hold an inquest if—
(a) the coroner considers the death is—
(i) a death in custody; or
(ii) a death in care, in circumstances that raise issues about the deceased person’s care; or
(iii) a death mentioned in section 8(3)(h) that is not also a death in custody, unless the coroner is satisfied the circumstances of the death do not require the holding of an inquest; or
(b) the Attorney-General directs the State Coroner to arrange for an inquest to be held into the death; or
(c) the State Coroner, on the State Coroner’s own initiative or on an application under section 30, orders an inquest be held into the death; or
(d) the District Court, on an application under section 30, orders an inquest be held into the death.

IF the coroner raises an inquest it will only be via 27 (1)(c), and why would he when the trial has made clear the actions of that night? The coroner is not a psychologist; he is not interested in determining what was going on in Miss Numpty's mind when she decided to climb over - she just went of her own accord and that is sufficient to satisfy the reason for death on the certificate. CASE CLOSED. Then I'll stop getting these stupid Google news alerts about this case finally! Sheesh!
Click to expand...

Sorry, are you saying an inquest is not going to happen?

You are wrong and your denial is hilarious.
 
lionking said:
Sorry, are you saying an inquest is not going to happen?
Click to expand...
Either you can read, or you cant.
lionking said:
You are wrong and your denial is hilarious.
Click to expand...
Lol, one only has to look at all your early posts in this thread to see who was so wrong. Your insistence that an inquest will be held is an amusing follow on from all that. Ive already explained why it wont be happening. Again, reading is a wonderful skill.
 
GlennCashQC said:
Either you can read, or you cant.
Lol, one only has to look at all your early posts in this thread to see who was so wrong. Your insistence that an inquest will be held is an amusing follow on from all that. Ive already explained why it wont be happening. Again, reading is a wonderful skill.
Click to expand...

An investigation into the death of New Zealander Warriena Wright has been re-opened by the Queensland state coroner.
Click to expand...

I'll happily get back to you with the results of this coroner's investigation. Your insistence it wouldn't happen is laughable.
 
lionking said:
I'll happily get back to you with the results of this coroner's investigation. Your insistence it wouldn't happen is laughable.
Click to expand...

If you were paying attention instead of just tailgating this thread, you'd see the file is merely now being examined as per standard procedure. That is not an investigation via an inquest. Despite your lack of understanding of coronial procedure, it was merely a matter of reading the article properly, not just the headline as you seem to do. Namely
"The coroner will be reviewing all the documentation before making a decision whether to hold an inquest," a state coroner's office spokesman told The Sunday Mail.
Click to expand...

Again, reading is a wonderful thing, as is seeing through the uneducated diatribe that ignorant halfwit journalists write. Its a skill some people do not have.

Keep repeating yourself. It highlights the veracity of your argument so well.
 
Last edited:
GlennCashQC said:
If you were paying attention instead of just tailgating this thread, you'd see the file is merely now being examined as per standard procedure. That is not an investigation via an inquest. Despite your lack of understanding of coronial procedure, it was merely a matter of reading the article properly, not just the headline as you seem to do. Namely


Again, reading is a wonderful thing, as is seeing through the uneducated diatribe that ignorant halfwit journalists write. Its a skill some people do not have.

Keep repeating yourself. It highlights the veracity of your argument so well.
Click to expand...

I read the report just fine, thanks. You are the one who said there would be no inquest and the the coroner would perfunctorily rubber-stamp the case closed. You are wrong. Not only is the coroner investigating this closely, an inquest is very much on the cards. This thing is not over.
 
This bit in the report was interesting - as we discussed this possibility at length here.

A charge such as deprivation of liberty could potentially be recommended, the newspaper reported.
Click to expand...

Whether there is a source for it, or just speculation by the journalist, I don't know
 
lionking said:
I read the report just fine, thanks. You are the one who said there would be no inquest and the the coroner would perfunctorily rubber-stamp the case closed. You are wrong. Not only is the coroner investigating this closely, an inquest is very much on the cards. This thing is not over.
Click to expand...
No you are just being petulant because you were corrected again, as has been the case so many times.
Opening a file is not an investigation. It is just paper work.
Opening a file is not an inquest.
I was right all along. You were wrong all along.Case closed.
 
GlennCashQC said:
No you are just being petulant because you were corrected again, as has been the case so many times.
Opening a file is not an investigation. It is just paper work.
Opening a file is not an inquest.
I was right all along. You were wrong all along.Case closed.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. You are being pedantic. Case is far from closed.
 
lionking said:
Yes it is. You are being pedantic. Case is far from closed.
Click to expand...
Its amazing how you invent stories to bolster your flagging argument.

Nothign pedantic about it, Ive worked in state and federal depts for many years and opening files on every single thing is default public service behaviour. Ive worked in one dept where they would open a file on every single complain received no matter how puerile. According to your logic, every public servant is now an investigator! lol

The coroner isnt investigating anything - they are just ticking off their checkboxes as per their obligations under law and creating a file record as do all depts. The file will sit in some useless bean counters intray for a while, and after Jan it will be rubber stamped, and thats the end of it. It's pretty well over now, and you'll have to find something new to get falsely indignant about.
 
Last edited:
Paralytic Drunk

Paralytic is what she was. Its legal to be paralytic drunk in private.

Its legal to screw with strangers.

Its legal to restrain somebody that has assaulted you or damaged your property.

Its illegal to assault somebody or damage their property even if you are paralytic.

So Tostee was on trial but Wright broke the law.

She croaked in the end.

I don't know about youse but I used to drink until paralytic every friday & saturday night when I was 14.

Her behavior was standard for a teenager but very immature for a grown woman.

Was she using drugs also? Was she mentally unstable or just immature and unable to hold alcohol?

It was such a stink date
 
gareththomasnz said:
Paralytic is what she was. Its legal to be paralytic drunk in private.

Its legal to screw with strangers.

Its legal to restrain somebody that has assaulted you or damaged your property.

Its illegal to assault somebody or damage their property even if you are paralytic.

So Tostee was on trial but Wright broke the law.

She croaked in the end.
I don't know about youse but I used to drink until paralytic every friday & saturday night when I was 14.
Her behavior was standard for a teenager but very immature for a grown woman.

Was she using drugs also? Was she mentally unstable or just immature and unable to hold alcohol?

It was such a stink date
Click to expand...

Lol. And your grammar reflects it!
 
gareththomasnz said:
It was such a stink date
Click to expand...

If I ever saw a Feudian slip, that was it. I'm guessing you'd know...

Meanwhile, that whole "staying low and nobody knowing where he is" schtick is getting a bit old.

The... I struggle to know what to call Eric Thomas, because he ain't no man, bloke, or even guy and "snivelling narcissistic piece of puke" is a bit tedious to post every time. I'll just stick to "thing".

The thing is such a snivelling narcissistic piece of puke that he is still crowing to the world about getting laid and how much his girlfriends support the wee cherub.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11780041

I do find it bloody hilarious that his new life goal is to complete eating challenges. I've been pointing out his new chubbier nature for a while, and he's clearly been getting some practice in.

:dl:

Eric Thomas seems to have found himself a niche among chubby-chasing chicks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom