Australia - Victory in court for Holcroft vs Hazzard - precedent set!
(media.greatawakening.win)
LET'S GOOOO
Comments (11)
sorted by:
Actually, don't know if its true, but even if the settlement is true, the fact that it is settled OUT OF COURT means that it explicitly does NOT establish a precedent, at least, not a legal one.
It is a form of precedent, but it would also imply that any individual officer etc, who wants to follow the same path will have to lawyer up and got the same way.
That'd be WHY they settled it out of court. To ensure that there is NO precedent.
There are still more trials related to this case... let's hope at least on of the other (two or three?) sticks the landing. If this particular one is a no-go we still have something to go on with... for now.
im sorry to say i sent this out, and it appears false? her lawyer came out and said the contrary. is there a valid source for this? (my claim)
Yeah I'm not entirely sure myself. I have been trying to verify because I noticed there's still hearings listed on the NSW supreme court website... something seems off unless they just haven't removed the hearing dates due to being recently settled?
this is fake. she was threatened and withdrew from the case
Source? I'm having trouble finding literally anything about this.
If she withdrew, or settled, either way... why is it still listed for a directional hearing on the 28th on the NSW supreme court website?
I can't find any other news or information about it at all... :/
https://www.supremecourt.justice.nsw.gov.au/Pages/sco2_caseofinterest/CoI_Hocroft.aspx
Hocroft... damn typos!
I am not a lawyer but i thought that settling out of court means there was no judgment from the bench so no precedent was set. Which means the they will just learn from this and attack it different next time.
Sorry no idea myself, just had this info passed on to me, so I passed it on again... it seems like there are still hearings in the supreme court, so I'm doing my best to verify.