this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
221 points (100.0% liked)
Australia
356 readers
130 users here now
Your one-stop shop for any and everything Australia.
Guidelines:
- Try to be a decent person and interact nicely
- Different opinions are tolerated, hate is not.
Other Communities:
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, the court literally gave the reason and it was for him not the victim.
It was because of the apparent risk that he'd harm himself (and none of us can accurately speculate on the reality of that), but the suppression order was lifted when he was found guilty.
He's not innocent and they still kept the suppression order afterwards, it was only removed after backlash and constant probes from media and citizens.
He was found guilty last Tuesday. Papers seem to ~~success~~ suggest the intervening week is to allow the legal teams to prepare for a request to extend, but that didn't happen.
I can't imagine you're suggesting that we should presume people are guilty before a jury concludes?
So there was one week where he was a known rapist, and it was illegal to call him that? One week seems like a reasonably short duration for the paperwork to be sorted.
Also to allow time for any appeals to be filed.