From: Noddy on 1 Apr 2010 05:59
"D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
> That's opposite to what I heard, the report I heard on the news said he
> was very apologetic.
Apparently he made a formal apology some time later (presumably after he'd
had a dressing down from the team boss), but when he was originally asked
about it early on Sunday morning it was quite the opposite.
From: D Walford on 1 Apr 2010 06:07
On 1/04/2010 8:58 PM, Noddy wrote:
> "D Walford"<dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
>> I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen but it will change with
>> time, the demographics of the area is slowly changing so Labour will lose
>> their grip on the area sooner or later.
>> I think your new place is in the Ballarat electorate which is currently
>> held by the ALP but there isn't much in it, a swing of about 4% could see
>> it go the other way so you could be a swinger after all:-)
> Cool. Wait 'till I tell the wife. She'll be over the moon :)
If I were you I'd keep my distance when I was telling her that she is
about to become a swinger:-)
From: D Walford on 1 Apr 2010 08:06
On 1/04/2010 9:21 PM, Noddy wrote:
> You've been complaining that it's because of who he is that he's been made
> an example out of. I disagree. I think that it's because of who he is that
> his punishment will have no impact on his attitude or his behaviour and he
> *should* be made an example out of purely in the interests of the example he
> himself sets for other people. That might give him a moment of pause *next*
> time he thinks about showing the world how much of a fuckwit he can be.
That assumes that he actually did what was reported in the Herald Sun
and anyone who has lived in Melb for more than 10mins knows how reliable
that rag is not, I'm surprised you believe the media reports without
question when you are usually the first to put journalists down, if by
some chance he did as reported then he deserves punishment equal to what
anyone else would get.
On the one hand you say that he should be treated like anyone else when
being charged then you suggest he should get a much harsher punishment,
you can't have it both ways, I don't have a problem with him being
treated exactly the same as any local Joe by the police and the courts.
> If he had an ounce of moral fibre he'd have sucked it up, said he was sorry
> and spent the next day visiting kids at the local hospital to try to redeem
I don't really care one way or the other what happens to Hamilton but I
do care that our State and Federal Govt's are turning this country into
a place that any control freak would be proud of.
From: Clocky on 1 Apr 2010 10:23
> "D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
>> That's opposite to what I heard, the report I heard on the news said
>> he was very apologetic.
> Apparently he made a formal apology some time later (presumably after
> he'd had a dressing down from the team boss), but when he was
> originally asked about it early on Sunday morning it was quite the
From: Doug Jewell on 1 Apr 2010 16:19
> "Clocky" <notgonn(a)happen.com> wrote in message
>> You would make a perfect ACA reporter... grab a headline, ignore the facts
>> and fill in the blanks with speculative sensationalism.
> I think an important point needs to be made here, as Hamilton's "supporters"
> seem to be suggesting that he was unfairly targeted for a trivial offence.
> The story as reported in last Sunday's Herald-Sun is that Hamilton drove the
> Benz out of the track onto Lakeside Drive at 9:15pm on Saturday night where
> there were a crowd of spectators, police on foot and in cars. The crowd
> apparently cheered him on and *despite* the obviously visible police
> presence Hamilton did a "Donut burnout" where he span the car around 360
> degrees while smoking the tires, and then fishtailed up lakeside drive
> before he was flagged down and booked.
> By any stretch of the imagination, this was *not* a trivial event where he
> was made a scapegoat. This was lunatic behaviour within close proximity of
> pedestrians and other vehicles, and he was *always* going to get pinched for
> it regardless of how important he thought he was.
> If he thought he wasn't, then the bloke's as sharp as a custard tart.
IF - IF that is what happened, then I agree the bloke
deserved what happened, and deserves more.
The story I'd heard was that it was a small amount of
wheelspin as he took off from the lights, and my comments in
this thread have been based on that. IOW a complete
over-reaction by the police for something that was
Probably somewhere between the two is the truth.
What is the difference between a duck?