I certainly don't Lovett*

So, Andrew Lovett has walked free on the rape charges brought against him by a distressed yet brave woman who pressed her claims all the way through the court hearing, unlike many women who are, or claim to be, sexually assaulted, but who are unwilling or unable to face the prospect of a drawn-out trial and possibly having to deal with their attacker again.

Part of the reason he got off could be because of the sexist, leading, leering questions asked of the alleged victim by Lovett's barrister, David Grace QC, such as these ones at the committal hearing about the length of her skirt:
"Was it a skirt that went from the waist down to your thighs? ... Did it start at your waist or below your waist? ... Was there any flesh visible between the end of the singlet and the top of the skirt? ... What was the distance between the top of the skirt and the bottom of the skirt?"

Unbelievable, right?

Fortunately, the Law Institute of Victoria got involved, via their spokesman Rob Stary, who said:

"The fact that they might be wearing a miniskirt or low-cut clothing really is not, at one strict level, relevant but if through some process of flirtation or invitation, the person's inviting attention or sexual contact then I suppose it can be relevant."

Wait, what?!?!

Well, at least the general public has a reason for not understanding the law, as displayed by this response in the comments section of the above article by "Bloke" from "Toorak":

"he's been proven to be innocent, so that should be the end of the issue for him. the court was there to try him, not the media or the masses."

Ahh, not exactly.

The rilestar could not let this aggression stand, man. This is the tamer of my submissions to The Age for publication in the same comments section:

"Just because a jury could not find someone guilty beyond all reasonable doubt does not mean they are innocent.
And the questions asked by the barrister in this case are reprehensible. In our society, a woman should be allowed to wear whatever she likes without fear of unwanted or forced sexual encounters. Contrary to what Mr Stary believes, such questions are in NO WAY relevant to the question of whether a rape occurred. Consent is not given by wearing a mini-skirt. If those questions changed the result of the jury's decision, then I would argue that there has been a miscarriage of justice.
I am sorry, on behalf of the male gender, to all of the women who are reading this who have been raped. You shouldn't have to put up with this."

An earlier submission had recommended that David Grace QC should change his first name to "Dis" and then continued to refer to him by his changed name. I also made unflattering - but fair - comparisons between him and Sheikh Al-Hilali. When The Age didn't publish that one I wrote the above comment, but that wasn't published either (except here).

Unlike The Age, I am against censorship. Especially censorship of me.

I'm also against rape (and, yes, especially rape of me), and injustice. It may be that Lovett was innocent, but if the trial allowed cross-examination such as that above, the fact that he got off does not help his protestations at all.

At least he's not with the Saints, anymore. We've got enough problems of our own making without outsiders making more for us...

* Bad opportunity for a pun? His name is "Lovett", and I am a weak man.

Cadel Comedown...or is it?

So, as predicted by this blog (what were the odds?!?), Cadel won the Tour on Sunday - the First Australian to do so. Exclamation Point!
So now the euphoria has died down..wait a minute...the euphoria hasn't died down at all!!
This is still Totally Awesome!!!
Even the New York Times reported his win!
Aussie, Aussie, Aussie!! Oui! Oui! Oui!
There were many questions about whether this was the greatest victory by an Australian sportsman ever, and I've gotta say I'm firmly in the "Yes" camp. I've watched pretty much every stage of the Tour for the last five years (barring two weeks last year when I stupidly booked a two-week holiday in Bali in July 2010 - what was I thinking?!?), so I think I was due a Cadel Victory after all that effort I put in.

Greatest moment of the 2011 Tour? Well, there were many. I recall Dave McKenzie saying years ago that every winner of the TDF has really stamped his authority on the race at least on one stage, and Cadel’s win on stage 4 up the Mur-de-Bretagne was clearly a stand-out (especially since he was at the back of the peloton with bike problems and 20km to go, and then he got to the front AND beat Contador BUT Contador claimed the win even though he DIDN'T - all GOLD with a capital G...and O, L and D).
Cadel was clearly a contender from the very beginning, continuously trying to keep himself at the front, and even stealing seconds or placings on such benign stages as stage 3 and 8. But then his efforts in the Alps were what really ended up ensuring he won the Tour.
A guy who really knows what he's talking about also called rilestar had this to say after the monumental stage 18:

"Ummm, @Brian 9:40am, not sure if you've been watching the same tour as me, but Cadel hasn't really been sitting on anyone's wheel...
He's attacked virtually from the beginning - coming second to Phillipe Gilbert on stage 2, winning stage 4, leading the main contenders up to Super Besse on stage 8, as well as the chase of Frank Schleck up to Luz-Ardiden and Andy Scheleck to Plateau de Beille, attacking with Contador and Sanchez on stage 16 into Gap, etc, etc.
In the super-high mountains he doesn't have the same acceleration as the Schlecks and Contador, but you could see last night that he still drove the main contenders in the chase of Andy Schleck, with everyone else sitting on HIS wheel.
I agree entirely with @Si 9:07am - I think his tactic was to watch Contador, mistakenly thinking that Contador and Bjarne Riis had some magical plan to turn things around on the final climb. By the time he realised that he was actually the strongest climber left in the main group, it was almost too late, and he had to do everything himself.
Which highlights the great tactics from Andy and Leopard.
If he can make time back on Andy and Frank tonight (knowing that Frank will probably attack tonight), he's in with a great chance. If he loses time, it may be all over...
Go Cadel!"

In the same comments section, Brett (who must now feel like a goose) stated "As tough as Cadel is , he is never going to win the tour, to win this race you have to attack in the mountians (sic), being a tempo rider and trying to claim the win with a good time trial is never going to cut it." Craig Schwartz rightly gave him a history lesson, reminding him that precisely such tactics helped Miguel Indurain win the Tour 5 times.
So yeah – Cadel didn’t win the Tour on stage 18 (that happened on Stage 20), but he ensured he didn’t lose it. Gimme an AWE, gimme a SOME.
Other highlights of the best Tour evaaa:

• Johnny Hoogerland’s efforts were amazing – after being hit by a car and consequently thrown into a barbed wire fence, he rode on to finish the stage and keep the King of the Mountains jersey, leading to the now classic phrase for anyone complaining about things being a little bit difficult: “Hoogerland the F*ck Up!”
• I don’t know why, but for the first year ever, I think I preferred Paul Sherwen’s commentary over Phil Liggett. That guy sure knows a lot about obscure stuff. Incidentally, I ran into him at Tour Down Under last year and said "Paul Sherwen?!? You're a legend...and you know you are!" (incidentally, I had been drinking up at Willunga a fair bit that day...)
• SBS even played "Mountains" by Biffy Clyro - for mine, the best Tour de France Mountain Song of all time (apart from "Mountain Song" by Jane's Addiction).
• I also discovered the Sag Wagon podcast by Sam Pang, Dave Culbert, and Sophie Smith, and which was a very enjoyable way of re-enjoying each stage the day after. Thanks to them I found a new appreciation for Anthony Tan's microphone technique, and even discovered my own favourite Chateau of the Day (Chateau de Laroque in Toirac).
• A post-Tour highlight was Mia Freedman questioning the importance of the win, and being told in no uncertain terms that it is the most important thing in the world (Dave Culbert tweeted via @Culbert_Report to @miafreedman "Cadel spent y'day not bragging about win in biggest annual sporting event. You spent it bragging about shopping at Sass & Bide").

As for lowlights, quite apart from the ol' standard gripes about Scott Sunderland's T-shirt and Tina Arena's appearance, for mine it was Thomas Voeckler's performance, along with that of his his teammate Pierre Rolland. Or, rather, everyone else going about how great they were. I understand he put in a good effort to get and then keep the yellow jersey, but let's be honest - he only got it because he had raced off on Stage 9 whilst the peleton was being cut to pieces by accidents, including two of his breakaway compatriots being hit by that car. He then held on by riding on everyone else's wheel. In particular, on the infamous Stage 18 where Cadel did his amazing "job of work" (in the immortal words of Paul Sherwen) to make time back on Andy Schleck, Voeckler was the only rider with a teammate in the chasing group, yet both of them sat back (figuratively speaking, it was probably a bit difficult riding in the Alps) and let Cadel do all the hard work. Even though it was only by this effort that Voeckler was able to keep yellow! Then, the following day, Rolland does it again by sticking on Sammy Sanchez's wheel to get up the mountain, then attacking him and Contador at the end to win on Alpe d'Huez.

At least, that's how I saw it.

But enough lowlights! The real highlight obviously came the following day with Cadel's win the following day in the Grenoble time trial, especially when both he and Andy were on the road at the same time, and Cadel's time ticked him over to being in the virtual maillot jaune. Ahhh, much celebration at Fed Square that night with the other 20 people watching it on the big screen...

As we all know, Cadel had come second twice, and was then able to finally win on the Champs d'Elysees. Not too shabby.

Another rider in a similar position was Mark Cavendish, who had also come second in the race for the green jersey twice before, and was then also able to literally win that prize on the Champs d'Elysees, as well as the stage. Chapeau, Missile de Manx!

Sadly, another cyclist who had also come second in the GC twice before was Andy Schleck - he was destined to come second a third time. But he's young - he'll have his chances again! He was also very gracious in defeat. I especially loved his subtle dig at Contador when congratulating Cadel, saying he thought Cadel deserved the win in 2011, though not so much the winner of the year before...
Finally, I'll finish my CADEL IS ACE rant with a comment that actually has some positive advice, as well:

"CADEL Evans will long be remembered for his feat in becoming the first Australian to win the Tour de France. And after a lifetime of hard training and courageous riding with injuries he will rightly be enriched by the flood of sponsorships that follow the yellow jersey like night follows day.
However, Cadel has unwittingly also pointed out a way in which every working Australian can save a million dollars and improve their personal fitness simply by swapping a second car for a bicycle.
Using realistic calculations and assuming a modicum of financial discipline, the million dollar aim or shaving 13 years off your mortgage is not a mere fantasy.
"A lot of people run a second car without a clear idea of what it is costing them -- if you run the numbers you'll find the bomb is costing you a bomb," said Bicycle Victoria chief executive Harry Barber.
"There is so much more people could be doing with that money than burning it up in a vehicle that spends 94 per cent of its life doing nothing."
I have checked Harry's numbers and if anything they are conservative - he has assumed the car is second-hand rather than new and is parked for the bargain basement price of $12 a day, a deal many city workers would grab if only they could find it.
On the other side of the equation, the capital and running costs for the bike are assumed at $1000 a year, which if anything is a little on the high side.
That leaves a net difference of $10,000 a year or $833 a month which is a significant sum in anybody's language.
The magic million dollars arrives if you do away with the second car at the age of 25 and stick with the bike until you retire and grows to an extra $3.58 million if salary sacrificed into superannuation instead.
But even a 45-year-old shedding two wheels and a motor for the commute would save an
impressive $358,000 or an extra $677,490 in superannuation.
If you add in a dose of realism with a mixed commute of public transport for when the weather is nasty, it shows the long term benefits of reducing spending and saving the difference or using it to pay off the mortgage early or pad out the super account.
If only US politicians could see the benefits of cutting spending and debt so clearly."

Hmmm...went a bit Tea Party at the end there, actually, but I'm all for the "On yer bike" sentiment.

Go Cadel.

Yellin' For Cadellin'!!!

I've got a whole bunch of half-drafted posts I need to finish about various issues of high import, such as the carbon tax and religion in schools and Star Wars, but I'm just going to continue ignoring them for a bit and get straight to the most important news ever: Cadel rode the time trial of his life last night, almost winning the stage (only coming second to Tony Martin by 7 seconds), but more importantly - taking almost 3 minutes on Andy Schleck and setting himself up to be the first Australian winner of the Tour de France!!!
Don't get me wrong - I like Andy (and Frank, for that matter - "the Schleck Girls" as my mate Dave calls them) - but he's young and will have plenty of opportunities to win the Tour in future - he can win all of them as far as I'm concerned. But Cadel's got this one. And that's enough for me (and I've been putting in the same time and effort staying up late and watching every stage of the Tour de France for the last five years as Cadel has riding it).
Much like a Saints premiership - I don't need to see years of dominance - I'll be very happy to see just one.
While on that topic, I'm pretty sure that there are only two possible sporting outcomes this year: 1. Cadel loses the Tour de France and the Saints also don't win a premiership, and 2. Cadel wins the Tour de France and the Saints do win the premiership. I can't think of any other possibilities.
So, with a looming Tour de France victory for Cadel tonight, it looks like the Saints will be staging a massive come-from-behind AFL victory in October this year.
That's just maths.
Go Cadel!