Bombertalk

Personally...I DONT CARE.

Wouldn't stand up in court, if wasn't found on him personally. The police would have to prove in court that he owned the 1 and only tablet. If others live in the house the degree of doubtful ownership he cannot be convicted.
Maybe the police will fingerprint the tablet, like the broken egg shells thrown at the Lance Wittnells case.......case dismissed.

What an f-ing fit up. Any cop with common sense would know it was unlikely to be his. The fact that they charged him is a joke. He should take legal action against them for wrongful arrest.

The cop was probably a Carlton supporter !!!

I know of a guy who got a court order because the police raided his house and found a stolen palm pilot. He claimed that he had no idea how it came to be in his flat, and that he had never seen it before, but his lawyer stated that the best thing he could do was to plead guilty to the offence because it was a stolen item and it was in his possession even though he claimed to have not known it was there and that he had never seen it before.

So I could not see why NLM could not get done for possession of ectasy in this case.

The law in this state can be a complete arse, NLM could get done for this and yet you had a guy yesterday who was found guilty of manslaugter who received a Community Based Order and avoided any jail time.

ealesy wrote:I know of a guy who got a court order because the police raided his house and found a stolen palm pilot. He claimed that he had no idea how it came to be in his flat, and that he had never seen it before, but his lawyer stated that the best thing he could do was to plead guilty to the offence because it was a stolen item and it was in his possession even though he claimed to have not known it was there and that he had never seen it before.

So I could not see why NLM could not get done for possession of ectasy in this case.

The law in this state can be a complete arse, NLM could get done for this and yet you had a guy yesterday who was found guilty of manslaugter who received a Community Based Order and avoided any jail time.

Hang on though, does the guy you know live alone in his flat? I would understand the charge it that is the case.

In NLM's case, others are living at that residence. I take it the police had a warrant to search the premises? If so, who was that warrant issued to? Seeing that NLM wasn't there, someone else would have opened up and let them in. And what was the basis for the warrant? Or was it a case of wanting to interview Nathan's relatives, and while they were there they "discovered" a tablet under the couch?

Obviously there are lot more questions than there are answers at the moment...

Nope, family home, and they were constantly having friends and associates through the flat.

They have booked a number of his relatives in similar raids. How hard is it to join th dots? Completely circumstantial.

I honestly think they just someone with a profile to advertise their little sting.

I also heard reported he had been booked for driving without a license. Is that right? or have mixed him up with Lovett?

yes Sismis he was caught driving without a licence... he didn't lose his licence he just simply forgot/didn't renew his licence that expired on the 7th June/July (forget which month) same penalty id say though, miniscule imo

Somewhat frustratingly, another forum I'm on has some inbred bimbo whose happy to sink him as guilty because "if you lay down with dogs, you'll wake up with fleas".

The poor bastard is almost certainly innocent - you wouldn't offer to do hair tests if you weren't - and yet this will follow him around for the rest of his career.

As soon as heard it I didn't think it was his tablet. It would be very much out of character of him.