Popular Post ATF Posted August 11, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 11, 2014 TWENTY TWO convictions for child sex offences, the youngest victim being a seven year old girl? What is the scum even doing out of jail?! Some of these judges need to be put on the dole and replaced with people who understand the concept of protecting society. Why on earth was he allowed a passport and why were the Thai Authorities not informed he's a pedophile? The whole business stinks! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 LOL Who the hell is defending a pedophile!? I was addressing what would be the news topic now if it wasn't totally (and rightly) overshadowed by the pedo issue. So what's worse, a paedo or a liar? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samran Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 LOL Who the hell is defending a pedophile!? I was addressing what would be the news topic now if it wasn't totally (and rightly) overshadowed by the pedo issue. So what's worse, a paedo or a liar? For some, a Thai female. Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 LOL Who the hell is defending a pedophile!? I was addressing what would be the news topic now if it wasn't totally (and rightly) overshadowed by the pedo issue. So what's worse, a paedo or a liar? A filthy lying paedophile trumps both of yours 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) samran, Firstly you say "she decides a child is better in their (meaning "her") care versus an orphanage" What on Earth led you to believe the child would be put in an orphanage? It's the made up assumption used by the Thai lady to justify her action. There was no evidence of that being the case, ever. She signed a binding/legal surrogacy contract. It's not simply that she's the mother without any recourse as the parent(s) supplied the genetic material. I agree though she had control and exercised it. Then lied about the story because she thought she would get away with it imv. Doesn't anyone else find that particular lie reprehensible - claiming in the world's press that they abandoned Gammy when all along it was her refusing to let them take Gammy? The main evidence against her is that she broke a contract by picking her own Hospital and by telling a bare face lie that she now admits to and which is incompatible with acceptable behavior OR is it OK with you lot to make allegations to the world's press that is only put right when contested and then she changes her story 180 degrees and agrees it was her who put a stop to Gammy going to OZ. Until someone shows me why this is factually wrong, I can't say I find everyone's defence of her at all credible. How on Earth can people say it is..... "The main evidence used against her is that:1) she is a woman2) she is a woman who happens to be Thai3) she was a paid surrogate (forgetting that someone was doing the paying)" What garbage! I have stated why I find her credibility zero and it never gets any discussion apart from he's a pedo. Exactly, she went public before knowing of the pedo stuff, so she was lying without even having that (or anything material) as cover at the time. what a Cow to have said they abandoned Gammy when she now says she refused to allow them to take Gammy. I fail to see how much worse the chronology and facts on this particular issue could be!! EDIT: Mosha - a pedo is worse of course. That's a no brainer! The subject matter of my original post was addressing and disputing her label as a Saint. I have already said it's not in the same league, but then I was not addressing that issue, but it seems no discussion on any other points can be held without recourse to the pedo element. An element the Thai lady had no knowledge of when taking action AND telling a whopper of a lie she had to come clean on when challenged on it. aimho Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balo Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 This is not rock science. The baby must be protected and taken away from the man who has been convicted as a repeated child sex offender. If there is any justice in Australia this must happen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Csnt understand why tge Aus authorities have not taken the child away considering the odious nonces criminal past. Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chooka Posted August 11, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 11, 2014 samran, Firstly you say "she decides a child is better in their care versus an orphanage" What on Earth led you to believe the child would be put in an orphanage? It's the made up assumption used by the Thai lady to justify her action. There was no evidence of that being the case, ever. She signed a binding/legal surrogacy contract. It's not simply that she's the mother without any recourse as the parent(s) supplied the genetic material. I agree though she had control and exercised it. Then lied about the story because she thought she would get away with it imv. Doesn't anyone else find that particular lie reprehensible - claiming in the world's press that they abandoned Gammy when all along it was her refusing to let them take Gammy? The main evidence against her is that she broke a contract by picking her own Hospital and by telling a bare face lie that she now admits to and which is incompatible with acceptable behavior OR is it OK with you lot to make allegations to the world's press that is only put right when contested and then she changes her story 180 degrees and agrees it was her who put a stop to Gammy going to OZ. Until someone shows me why this is factually wrong, I can't say I find everyone's defence of her at all credible. How on Earth can people say it is..... "The main evidence used against her is that:1) she is a woman2) she is a woman who happens to be Thai3) she was a paid surrogate (forgetting that someone was doing the paying)" What garbage! I have stated why I find her credibility zero and it never gets any discussion apart from he's a pedo. Exactly she went public before knowing of the pedo stuff, so she was lying without even having that (or anything material) as cover at the time. what a Cow to have said they abandoned Gammy when she now says she refused to allow them to take Gammy. I fail to see how much worse the chronology and facts on this issue could be!! EDIT: Mosha a pedo is worse of course. The subject matter of my original post was addressing and disputing her label as a Saint. I have already said it's not in the same league, but then I was not addressing that issue. She signed a binding/legal surrogacy contract Except that contract is illegal in Thailand and Australia....... 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATF Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Twix she looked after the baby a long time before she got financial assistance. I would try not to be so cynical. Sure she was a surrogate for the money but 400k baht is hardly a fortune. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc. Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them? Can anyone? Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened and in isolation and chronology and simply say she is.... 1. No Saint 2. A liar 3. untrustworthy 4. and imo deceitful and likely opportunistic with that lie. I know of no known basis of fact for her views at the specific time stated it was the anoymous Ozzies, when it was her decision. Simply despicable until the truth was forced out. CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!! again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue. ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to as if it was no big deal when it had actually caused an outrage AUSSIE COUPLE ABANDONED DS BABY, until superceded by the pedo details when they subsequently came out. The truth was the Thai lady refused to allow them to take Gammy, yet stated Gammy was abandoned. She truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kooweerup Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc. Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them. Can anyone? Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened in isolation and chronology and simply say she is.... 1. No Saint 2. A liar 3. untrustworthy 4. and imo deceitful, opportunistic and that lie, when I know of no known basis of fact for her views at that specific time to state it was the anoymous Ozzies when it was her was simply despicable. CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!! again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue. ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to. It's like hitting my head against a brick wall - you are all in denial unable to focus on anything not pedo related - she truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol Have you watched the 40 minute interview with the filthy paedophile father? He stumbles, stutters and back flips all the way through it trying to cover up his filthy lies. He has made her credibility through his crap. Watch it then come back. Oh the links have been added all through this topic so don't ask for it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kooweerup Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc. Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them. Can anyone? Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened in isolation and chronology and simply say she is.... 1. No Saint 2. A liar 3. untrustworthy 4. and imo deceitful, opportunistic and that lie, when I know of no known basis of fact for her views at that specific time to state it was the anoymous Ozzies when it was her was simply despicable. CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!! again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue. ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to. It's like hitting my head against a brick wall - you are all in denial unable to focus on anything not pedo related - she truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol Have you watched the 40 minute interview with the filthy paedophile father? He stumbles, stutters and back flips all the way through it trying to cover up his filthy lies. He has made her credibility through his crap. Watch it then come back. Oh the links have been added all through this topic so don't ask for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wat dee Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Convicted pedos should not be allowed to have children in any way, shape or form. No adoption, fostering, surrogacy, natural means or by virgin birth!!! 1 of the many rights you should give up when you are convicted of the lowest form of crime. I am amazed that chemical castration is not used by judges. I don't belief in drugs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kooweerup Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc. Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them? Can anyone? Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened and in isolation and chronology and simply say she is.... 1. No Saint 2. A liar 3. untrustworthy 4. and imo deceitful and likely opportunistic with that lie. I know of no known basis of fact for her views at the specific time stated it was the anoymous Ozzies, when it was her decision. Simply despicable until the truth was forced out. CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!! again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue. ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to as if it was no big deal when it had actually caused an outrage AUSSIE COUPLE ABANDONED DS BABY, until superceded by the pedo details when they subsequently came out. The truth was the Thai lady refused to allow them to take Gammy, yet stated Gammy was abandoned. She truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol WOW pedo bashing, didn't realise these low life pieces of crap where protected and respected species. This vermin actually makes me sick feeding off helpless children. Go ahead support your kind and protect yourselves all you want but I will never accept you lowlifes. Edited August 11, 2014 by Kooweerup 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) . Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) . Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) . Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) . Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) duplicate posts Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) How difficult is it to understand.........I think the Ozzie guy is a slimeball, though I have no proof he is still a danger, just my strong belief/expectation. We are all agreed.For the umpteenth time......I am trying to discuss the Saint (Thai lady) and her actions. That is simply not possible as there appears to be a mental block to only discuss everything in terms of pedo.However, I do have proof the Thai lady told a serious lie. She has said so by changing her story fundamentally and admitting the truth after being challenged. That she gets a pass on this is stunning as I view it as very telling of her character - supports her changing of Hospital.It was not a little white lie. It was a massive unsupported distortion that on the facts she had at that time was truly an appalling accusation to make when it was infact her not them. She thought she would get away with it and with you lot she has. Amazing!The Thai lady is not the headline story and she shouldn't be, but her behavior is worthy of discussion imv.No wonder there are horror stories of gullible foreigners, when lies this big are excused. LOLEDIT: Prime example of an Amoeba is our Kooweerup. Support my kind - What a dimwitted offensive prat!! Edited August 11, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomSand Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 Doesn't the baby look just like his "mum" ? Photo from: http://asiancorrespondent.com/125664/gammy-story-full-of-bizarre-twists-prompts-surrogacy-crackdown-in-thailand/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post samran Posted August 11, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 11, 2014 EDIT: Prime example of an Amoeba is our Kooweerup. Support my kind - What a dimwitted offensive prat!! Takes one to know one I guess... As the Eagles song says.... 'you can't hide you(r) lying thais' Bit hard to take you seriously when you spout shit like that. Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker69 Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc. Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them? Can anyone? Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened and in isolation and chronology and simply say she is.... 1. No Saint 2. A liar 3. untrustworthy 4. and imo deceitful and likely opportunistic with that lie. I know of no known basis of fact for her views at the specific time stated it was the anoymous Ozzies, when it was her decision. Simply despicable until the truth was forced out. CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!! again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue. ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to as if it was no big deal when it had actually caused an outrage AUSSIE COUPLE ABANDONED DS BABY, until superceded by the pedo details when they subsequently came out. The truth was the Thai lady refused to allow them to take Gammy, yet stated Gammy was abandoned. She truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol Sigh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post geodesic Posted August 11, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 11, 2014 ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to as if it was no big deal when it had actually caused an outrage AUSSIE COUPLE ABANDONED DS BABY, until superceded by the pedo details when they subsequently came out. The truth was the Thai lady refused to allow them to take Gammy, yet stated Gammy was abandoned. Get a grip man. What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand? You are jumping on this girl's omission of a detail to a complicated story and trying to claim that means the pedophile is not the scumbag he truly is. Did you see the Australian psycopath slimebag pedophile FIGHTING to try and get the DS kid? Because I sure didn't. He didn't want the kid. He abandoned him no matter how you try and twist the story. The girl may not be a saint, but she didn't lie. No, in fact, psycopath slimeball pedophile's first response was to DENY there even was another child, then he changed his story and said he LEFT HIS SUPPOSEDLY DYING SON after only a day and without sticking around to say goodbye, and now, only after all his other lies fell through, do we see him twisting his story yet again to try and rewrite history and make the girl a villian. Sorry. The girl did exactly the right thing. She recognized that he wasn't going to love the child, so she did what was morally necessary. She kept the baby and told him to bugger off. My only thought is that it is too bad she didn't keep the girl too. I haven't seen anything which makes me respect this girl any less. She sounds like an honorable person to me who was put in a bad situation and had to make a hard choice. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted August 11, 2014 Share Posted August 11, 2014 he was convicted for molesting girls..... so why does he want the boy baby? should have been castrated upon conviction, then this unfortunate situation would never have happened!!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix38 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 (edited) geodesic, you wrote...."What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand?" How many times do I have to state.....I am not talking about the Ozzies in making this point. I am only talking about the Thai lady and what she said. She said they abandoned the baby and they did. She originally blamed them for doing so quite clearly and without any other information just stating they abandoned their DS baby with all the emotion that created at the time!! Then she admits the actual reason, only after forced by their rebuff of her accusation, was that she refused to let them take the baby. She was the reason they couldn't take Gammy! To say to the world's media that they walked away when the truth was she denied to allow them to take Gammy means to most people the original statement was a clear lie that she changed and that's how it has been reported. Whatever the right and wrongs of her actions, she clearly lied, so what don't you understand? "A little omission in a complicated story"! - that just happened AT THE TIME to have been the whole story before the pedo aspect was even known about. It was as deliberate and calculated as you get imv and generated the headline story. You can't say what she said when the truth was the opposite but she failed to mention SHE stopped them taking Gammy, but rather blamed them for deserting a DS baby and the point is that only now has she come clean and told the truth. It's there for anyone looking to call her a Saint! Some of you can't seperate the pedo aspect from anything else, when you know she acted and accused ahead of this fact ever being known about. It is obvious and in her interview she changes her story and the BBC comment on it - at least they are awake. It's been reported as such without actually calling her a liar. she changed her story fundamentally by filling in a fundamental detail she just happened to have ommited first time round and only when questioned because the ozzie's spoke out with a different version and reason for the abandonment. i.e. she told a lie and let it persist until forced to correct it. To call it a little omission is laughable and naive! She had plenty of time to see the press headlines and frenzy her statement caused and correct the false impression, but only did so when challenged and forced to answer a different version of abandonment and supply the truth and admit it was her refusal. Obviously I have to re-state that the pedo aspect is far far worse. She is no Saint though. Edited August 12, 2014 by twix38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 geodesic, you wrote...."What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand?" How many times do I have to state.....I am not talking about the Ozzies in making this point. I am only talking about the Thai lady and what she said. She said they abandoned the baby and they did. She originally blamed them for doing so quite clearly and without any other information just stating they abandoned their DS baby with all the emotion that created at the time!! Then she admits the actual reason, only after forced by their rebuff of her accusation, was that she refused to let them take the baby. She was the reason they couldn't take Gammy! To say to the world's media that they walked away when the truth was she denied to allow them to take Gammy means to most people the original statement was a clear lie that she changed and that's how it has been reported. Whatever the right and wrongs of her actions, she clearly lied, so what don't you understand? "A little omission in a complicated story"! - that just happened AT THE TIME to have been the whole story before the pedo aspect was even known about. It was as deliberate and calculated as you get imv and generated the headline story. You can't say what she said when the truth was the opposite but she failed to mention SHE stopped them taking Gammy, but rather blamed them for deserting a DS baby and the point is that only now has she come clean and told the truth. It's there for anyone looking to call her a Saint! Some of you can't seperate the pedo aspect from anything else, when you know she acted and accused ahead of this fact ever being known about. It is obvious and in her interview she changes her story and the BBC comment on it - at least they are awake. It's been reported as such without actually calling her a liar. she changed her story fundamentally by filling in a fundamental detail she just happened to have ommited first time round and only when questioned because the ozzie's spoke out with a different version and reason for the abandonment. i.e. she told a lie and let it persist until forced to correct it. To call it a little omission is laughable and naive! She had plenty of time to see the press headlines and frenzy her statement caused and correct the false impression, but only did so when challenged and forced to answer a different version of abandonment and supply the truth and admit it was her refusal. Obviously I have to re-state that the pedo aspect is far far worse. She is no Saint though. Compared to Farrell she is. One good thing is, if his neighbours did not know about him, they do now. Does Australia not have a sexual offenders disclosure scheme? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple1 Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 geodesic, you wrote...."What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand?" How many times do I have to state.....I am not talking about the Ozzies in making this point. I am only talking about the Thai lady and what she said. She said they abandoned the baby and they did. She originally blamed them for doing so quite clearly and without any other information just stating they abandoned their DS baby with all the emotion that created at the time!! Then she admits the actual reason, only after forced by their rebuff of her accusation, was that she refused to let them take the baby. She was the reason they couldn't take Gammy! To say to the world's media that they walked away when the truth was she denied to allow them to take Gammy means to most people the original statement was a clear lie that she changed and that's how it has been reported. Whatever the right and wrongs of her actions, she clearly lied, so what don't you understand? "A little omission in a complicated story"! - that just happened AT THE TIME to have been the whole story before the pedo aspect was even known about. It was as deliberate and calculated as you get imv and generated the headline story. You can't say what she said when the truth was the opposite but she failed to mention SHE stopped them taking Gammy, but rather blamed them for deserting a DS baby and the point is that only now has she come clean and told the truth. It's there for anyone looking to call her a Saint! Some of you can't seperate the pedo aspect from anything else, when you know she acted and accused ahead of this fact ever being known about. It is obvious and in her interview she changes her story and the BBC comment on it - at least they are awake. It's been reported as such without actually calling her a liar. she changed her story fundamentally by filling in a fundamental detail she just happened to have ommited first time round and only when questioned because the ozzie's spoke out with a different version and reason for the abandonment. i.e. she told a lie and let it persist until forced to correct it. To call it a little omission is laughable and naive! She had plenty of time to see the press headlines and frenzy her statement caused and correct the false impression, but only did so when challenged and forced to answer a different version of abandonment and supply the truth and admit it was her refusal. Obviously I have to re-state that the pedo aspect is far far worse. She is no Saint though. Compared to Farrell she is. One good thing is, if his neighbours did not know about him, they do now. Does Australia not have a sexual offenders disclosure scheme? varies between States & Territories http://aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/carc/3b.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 geodesic, you wrote...."What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand?" How many times do I have to state.....I am not talking about the Ozzies in making this point. I am only talking about the Thai lady and what she said. She said they abandoned the baby and they did. She originally blamed them for doing so quite clearly and without any other information just stating they abandoned their DS baby with all the emotion that created at the time!! Then she admits the actual reason, only after forced by their rebuff of her accusation, was that she refused to let them take the baby. She was the reason they couldn't take Gammy! To say to the world's media that they walked away when the truth was she denied to allow them to take Gammy means to most people the original statement was a clear lie that she changed and that's how it has been reported. Whatever the right and wrongs of her actions, she clearly lied, so what don't you understand? "A little omission in a complicated story"! - that just happened AT THE TIME to have been the whole story before the pedo aspect was even known about. It was as deliberate and calculated as you get imv and generated the headline story. You can't say what she said when the truth was the opposite but she failed to mention SHE stopped them taking Gammy, but rather blamed them for deserting a DS baby and the point is that only now has she come clean and told the truth. It's there for anyone looking to call her a Saint! Some of you can't seperate the pedo aspect from anything else, when you know she acted and accused ahead of this fact ever being known about. It is obvious and in her interview she changes her story and the BBC comment on it - at least they are awake. It's been reported as such without actually calling her a liar. she changed her story fundamentally by filling in a fundamental detail she just happened to have ommited first time round and only when questioned because the ozzie's spoke out with a different version and reason for the abandonment. i.e. she told a lie and let it persist until forced to correct it. To call it a little omission is laughable and naive! She had plenty of time to see the press headlines and frenzy her statement caused and correct the false impression, but only did so when challenged and forced to answer a different version of abandonment and supply the truth and admit it was her refusal. Obviously I have to re-state that the pedo aspect is far far worse. She is no Saint though. Compared to Farrell she is. One good thing is, if his neighbours did not know about him, they do now. Does Australia not have a sexual offenders disclosure scheme? varies between States & Territories http://aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/carc/3b.html Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 Baby Gammy: WA Health Minister Kim Hames apologises for 'inappropriate' comments about father David Farnell Western Australia's Health Minister has apologised for his "inappropriate" comments regarding the Australian parents of baby Gammy and his twin sister. Kim Hames said after seeing a television interview with the couple he was convinced of David Farnell's remorse about his past child sex offences. Dr Hames also said he believed Mr Farnell, from Bunbury, would take "good care" of his daughter and son. "I hang my head in shame for that," he told Channel Nine in an interview on Sunday night. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-11/health-minister-apologises-for-gammy-father-comments/5663814 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now