Tinder Hookup Gone Wrong

[psyche101]

11 minutes ago, Habitat said:

They are even talking of an inquest into the Whiskey-au-go-go tragedy. That was 1973 !  I reckon if Tostee keeps trying to put himself in front of TV cameras, the chances increase.

Meh, talk is cheap 

It would be a losing battle. 

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

Meh, talk is cheap 

It would be a losing battle. 

He cannot be re-tried for murder, but he can be tried on other charges, if the Coroner recommends, and the DPP is on board. He is crazy for keeping it in the public gaze.

[psyche101]

24 minutes ago, Habitat said:

He cannot be re-tried for murder, but he can be tried on other charges, if the Coroner recommends, and the DPP is on board. He is crazy for keeping it in the public gaze.

Coroner's findings have been submitted. Can't see what an exhumation would reveal at this stage. Sounds more like the fools trying to hurt him are just putting him in a cash cow spotlight. If things went quiet, who knows. Maybe a cuzzie bro might rock up on his doorstep one day. The spotlight is protecting him too.

Don't think he has a choice. He's quite a target. 

[aztek]

charged with what? he didn't kill her,  did not push her off, did not even text her to encourage to jump, did not kidnap her, did not rapoe her...  he threw a drunk combative female out on the balcony to chill out, for his own protection,  she fell down later,  that is a tragic accident, not a crime. what happens before does  not matter.   being an a hole isn't a crime. or is it in that part of the world.??

[Booth]

8 hours ago, aztek said:

charged with what? he didn't kill her,  did not push her off, did not even text her to encourage to jump, did not kidnap her, did not rapoe her...  he threw a drunk combative female out on the balcony to chill out, for his own protection,  she fell down later,  that is a tragic accident, not a crime. what happens before does  not matter.   being an a hole isn't a crime. or is it in that part of the world.??

You've hit the nail on the head, my friend. That's exactly (and obviously) what this case was from the very beginning: just two drunk morons acting like too drunk morons. She got out of control, so he put her out. Had Tostee picked up the phone right away and told the police "Hey, some crazy drunk chick just jumped off my balcony", he would've never been charged. This case was pursued because the public was outraged that he went and grabbed a slice of "super supreme" rather than call for "help". As though someone who has fallen 14 stories and landed on concrete can be helped in any way...

[Jujo-jo]

On 1/23/2020 at 3:48 PM, Booth said:

How is he 100% to blame? She attacked him, repeatedly, so he put her out on the balcony to protect himself. Frankly I think he showed tremendous restraint.

That's just crazy! A man of that size could have just walked out of his own apartment as well!

[Jujo-jo]

He was responsible for her in my opinion, she was in his care, in his apartment, under his watch. 

Her saying no 33 times ment nothing, we only here that he was restraining her but is that all that he was doing you can also him him breathing very heavy why cuz he was carrying or to the balcony did he push her or hang her over the edge for a bit possibly, but what we hear is that he did not, too bad there wasn't a camera that recorded the out side of the balcony but either way he should have received some type of reprimand she was in his care at the time of the event and their was a loss of life! 

Makes me mad and sad! Another night intended for fun but ends tragically but also at the same time both persons should have known that ANYTHING could go wrong especially when using sites and agencies like that just to hook up for sex with strangers.

[Booth]

20 hours ago, Jujo-jo said:

He was responsible for her in my opinion, she was in his care, in his apartment, under his watch. 

And you raise what could be a fair point. I will totally agree with you, just as soon as you acknowledge that women are essentially like children and should be treated that way. If you want to say women are not responsible for their behavior because they are women and it is the duty of men to guide them, care for them and protect them while under their watch, I have no disagreement with that. But understand, this also means that women can not be not permitted to make decisions about their own well-being. You can't have it both ways. If women are not responsible for their own choices, then they can't be free to make choices. A woman will be permitted to do only what the man responsible for her(father, husband, boyfriend, date) allows her to do. Fair enough?

[Jujo-jo]

1 hour ago, Booth said:

And you raise what could be a fair point. I will totally agree with you, just as soon as you acknowledge that women are essentially like children and should be treated that way. If you want to say women are not responsible for their behavior because they are women and it is the duty of men to guide them, care for them and protect them while under their watch, I have no disagreement with that. But understand, this also means that women can not be not permitted to make decisions about their own well-being. You can't have it both ways. If women are not responsible for their own choices, then they can't be free to make choices. A woman will be permitted to do only what the man responsible for her(father, husband, boyfriend, date) allows her to do. Fair enough?

Umm, no! Sorry but not fair enough, I think you might have misunderstood me or maybe I didn't make myself clear enough.

And if you think all women act like children then maybe you should consider changing the women you're hanging out with.

First and most importantly we are all responsible for our own actions, but when drugs and alcohol are involved and YOU make the choice of putting yourself in that invorment, the moment you are in that type of situation with another person, the person that is less intoxicated should have that person's back no matter what it takes! And they general become the responsible party at that point by nature.

Or if it becomes to much be responsible, then you should be responsible enough to walk away and remove yourself from the situation. That is being responsible!

It doesn't matter if your a man or a women, woman to woman, man to man, man to woman, makes no difference at all!

Same with physical strength, lets say if you are with a person who is physically weak and that person gets jumped out of the blue; the person with the most physical strength should be responsible enough to help the weak person; or would the strong one sit back and let it happen?

Like they say, with friends like that you don't need enemie.

And then the point of being responsible means very little in all aspects, especially when it comes to life or death and future outcomes from events.

 

 

[Habitat]

I am sure the perception of "fast and loose" promiscuity played a part in the way this case was prosecuted, if she was not tarred with that, things may have gone differently.

[Booth]

1 hour ago, Jujo-jo said:

Umm, no! Sorry but not fair enough, I think you might have misunderstood me or maybe I didn't make myself clear enough.

And if you think all women act like children then maybe you should consider changing the women you're hanging out with.

First and most importantly we are all responsible for our own actions, but when drugs and alcohol are involved and YOU make the choice of putting yourself in that invorment, the moment you are in that type of situation with another person, the person that is less intoxicated should have that person's back no matter what it takes! And they general become the responsible party at that point by nature.

Or if it becomes to much be responsible, then you should be responsible enough to walk away and remove yourself from the situation. That is being responsible!

It doesn't matter if your a man or a women, woman to woman, man to man, man to woman, makes no difference at all!

Same with physical strength, lets say if you are with a person who is physically weak and that person gets jumped out of the blue; the person with the most physical strength should be responsible enough to help the weak person; or would the strong one sit back and let it happen?

Like they say, with friends like that you don't need enemie.

And then the point of being responsible means very little in all aspects, especially when it comes to life or death and future outcomes from events.

 

 

Well, I'm trying to understand, but you're not making yourself very clear. First you said that "He was responsible for her in my opinion, she was in his care, in his apartment, under his watch". Then you say "First and most importantly we are all responsible for our own actions" These are contradictory statements. Is she responsible for her own actions, or is he responsible for her? It can't be both.

[Jujo-jo]

9 minutes ago, Booth said:

Well, I'm trying to understand, but you're not making yourself very clear. First you said that "He was responsible for her in my opinion, she was in his care, in his apartment, under his watch". Then you say "First and most importantly we are all responsible for our own actions" These are contradictory statements. Is she responsible for her own actions, or is he responsible for her? It can't be both.

Yes it can be both, it all depends on the circumstances! If a person is intoxicated to the point they've lost their logic and are no longer responsible to make responsible decisions, than ya gotta step up and do your part that's part of being human and having compassion and being a responsible party and again it makes no difference if it's a man or women.

[Booth]

15 minutes ago, Jujo-jo said:

Yes it can be both, it all depends on the circumstances! If a person is intoxicated to the point they've lost their logic and are no longer responsible to make responsible decisions, than ya gotta step up and do your part that's part of being human and having compassion and being a responsible party and again it makes no difference if it's a man or women.

But no, it really can't be both, and it's not a matter of circumstance. Either we're all responsible for ourselves or we're not. If a woman intoxicates herself beyond logic, who's responsibility is that? It's hers, isn't it? If you want to say it's noble and good to help others, you'll get no disagreement from me, but Wright was a "strong empowered woman". She was under her own care, under her own watch. She was responsible for herself. How can Tostee be responsible for her and the choices she made? 

[Golden Duck]

5 hours ago, Habitat said:

I am sure the perception of "fast and loose" promiscuity played a part in the way this case was prosecuted, if she was not tarred with that, things may have gone differently.

True, and we only get one side of the story from someone who was holidaying on Her Majesty's expense, has been found guilty of fraud and been banned from an Gold Coast Night Club for being too creepy.

If he had the foresight to record an evening with a guest, you don't suppose he could play up to that recording do you?

Then there's the potential indictment for deprivation of liberty. 

Wright gets no luxury of natural justice.

[psyche101]

19 hours ago, Jujo-jo said:

Yes it can be both, it all depends on the circumstances! If a person is intoxicated to the point they've lost their logic and are no longer responsible to make responsible decisions, than ya gotta step up and do your part that's part of being human and having compassion and being a responsible party and again it makes no difference if it's a man or women.

They were both intoxicated so who is supposed to be the responsibile one? That's the blind leading the blind in this care isn't it? 

[psyche101]

15 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

True, and we only get one side of the story from someone who was holidaying on Her Majesty's expense, has been found guilty of fraud and been banned from an Gold Coast Night Club for being too creepy.

If he had the foresight to record an evening with a guest, you don't suppose he could play up to that recording do you?

Then there's the potential indictment for deprivation of liberty. 

Wright gets no luxury of natural justice.

I disagree. Wrights death was investigated as well as any other. I don't feel that the tape shows she could not leave, during the evening right up until the last minutes plenty of opportunities were there. I don't consider seperating a violent person from oneself deprivation of liberty. I just don't see too many other options in that instance. 

[Jujo-jo]

She was heard crying out a cpl times "I want to go home." if she were able she would have. She was also heard saying no 33 times. "NO" to what there was a reason she was saying no.

[Jujo-jo]

31 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

They were both intoxicated so who is supposed to be the responsibile one? That's the blind leading the blind in this care isn't it? 

It definitely sounded like she was more intoxicated then him.

[psyche101]

34 minutes ago, Jujo-jo said:

She was heard crying out a cpl times "I want to go home." if she were able she would have. She was also heard saying no 33 times. "NO" to what there was a reason she was saying no.

She said no when he had enough and locked her out on the balcony. 

Both are to blame. 

[Jujo-jo]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

She said no when he had enough and locked her out on the balcony. 

Both are to blame. 

Yes both are to blame, I agree but he was not held accountable, he could have done things MUCH different but choose not to and there was a lose of life that occured in his presence, in his home.

[psyche101]

34 minutes ago, Jujo-jo said:

It definitely sounded like she was more intoxicated then him.

I don't think you're supporting your point. They were both drunk, and acted irresponsible. There is plenty of violent behaviour recorded from Ms Wright. IMHO all those trying to defend her are just dredging up her worst qualities. I don't think that's helpful at all.

I keep saying, the thing to take away here is the danger of the situation. That needs to be paramount. It could save lives. Demonising Tostee isn't going to help stop things like this happening. Both parties were at fault, both showed poor judgement and behaviour. 

[psyche101]

Just now, Jujo-jo said:

Yes both are to blame, I agree but he was not held accountable, he could have done things MUCH different but choose not to and there was a lose of life that occured in his presence, in his home.

So could she, she was asked to leave several times, she should have. 

[Jujo-jo]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

I don't think you're supporting your point. They were both drunk, and acted irresponsible. There is plenty of violent behaviour recorded from Ms Wright. IMHO all those trying to defend her are just dredging up her worst qualities. I don't think that's helpful at all.

I keep saying, the thing to take away here is the danger of the situation. That needs to be paramount. It could save lives. Demonising Tostee isn't going to help stop things like this happening. Both parties were at fault, both showed poor judgement and behaviour. 

Yes both are to blame, I agree but he was not held accountable, he could have done things MUCH different but choose not to and there was a lose of life that occured in his presence, in his home.

[psyche101]

1 minute ago, Jujo-jo said:

Yes both are to blame, I agree but he was not held accountable, he could have done things MUCH different but choose not to and there was a lose of life that occured in his presence, in his home.

You already said that. It doesn't matter that it was his home. In this situation I don't see that making any difference.

The danger needs to be identified. That will help in the future. Pointing fingers right now will not. 

[GlitterRose]

I don't know if we're all listening to the same thing.

I can sure tell the woman is terrified.