Thanks, well worth the read:

"For example, the public were not told that the next witness, Jan Armstrong, an HSU life member and former member of the Union’s committee, was issued with an HSU credit card in 1993 at the insistence of the then national committee for her use while she attended a meeting in Canada to support the Union and the trade union movement. But playing games on Facebook in court took precedence over her testimony to those whom Murdoch media’s Ean Higgins once described as “professional journalists”.

Ms Armstrong testified that she had discovered irregularities in Jeff Jackson’s credit card usage — then, later, at the lead-up to a branch election, Jeff Jackson falsely claimed that she had misused her credit card. This was shown to be a baseless allegation, and the subject of a defamation action from Ms Armstrong, from which Jackson was forced to settle and withdraw his accusations. "

---

@tezza2844 wrote:
May be of interest to read the unabridged account of the days proceeding http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/craig-thomson-trial-day-one-what-you-d...

---

Haha, I forgot the link  😄

http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/craig-thomson-trial-day-2-more-of-what...

---

@donnashuggy wrote:

You can't really shield them in court can you silverfaun?

 

Let's hope all of these shonks in the liberal party are given the same treatment, eh?

---

Why does it need to go to court anyway, if our right wing brigade here has already pronounced him guilty on all charges? Can't we just hang him now and save ourselves the expense of evaluating evidence?

Royal Commissions - music to the ears of the legal fraternity.

Whenever a Royal Commission is announced "pop" goes the French bubbles in Chambers.   Specially when it comes gift-wrapped and unnecessary like the "Pink Batts" one.

I can't imagine that the brothel owner spilling all in court would do much for his business.   I mean, who would go there now, knowing that your personal details aren't safe ?

This will run shivers through the judiciary, the police force, politicians and assorted "Captains of Industry" 

Who knows, a few of those in the court - on both sides of the bench - could be on his current client list, no doubt studiously avoiding eye contact during his testimony

---

@pct001wine wrote:

I can't imagine that the brothel owner spilling all in court would do much for his business.   I mean, who would go there now, knowing that your personal details aren't safe ?

 

This will run shivers through the judiciary, the police force, politicians and assorted "Captains of Industry" 

 

Who knows, a few of those in the court - on both sides of the bench - could be on his current client list, no doubt studiously avoiding eye contact during his testimony

---

Apparently he is no longer the owner.

According to the article he wasn't even summoned to appear.  He offered.