Josh Reynolds

[Tiger5150]

After the new grenade of public evidence, I reckon this topic is best avoided until the courts actually deal with it. Too much speculation still.

I agree and I question the logic behind opening it up. Was it because there was new evidence that seems to back JR up? If there was new evidence damning JR would the thread been opened back up?

Its still before the courts, its still untested, despite what everyone here seems to be thinking, he hasnt been exonerated by Ch9.

 

[wokesmoke]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

:face_with_rolling_eyes:

I went back over the thread. I don't think anyone said it's ok to assault a woman. Since all we have seen so far is Josh getting angry and swearing I'd say that if the allegations about her are true then his anger has at least been put into perspective.

A lot of “it all makes sense” comments. = condoning it.

 

[wokesmoke]

Answer is no. I didn’t know that I was responding to DV. It’s worse than I thought. Again assault is a threshold. If he whacked her, he should be gone and is a pig.

Agree that no one should hit a woman,however I have seen plenty of women king hit men,hit them with chairs and glasses,all comes from working within the hotel industry for over 40 years..If a woman told me twice that we lost twins as a way of trying to rort me as she has done to Josh,I couldn't help but knock her clean out without thinking twice....you want to know why...because as a man who loves children and life itself,to get excited about the birth of MY children and then being deflated by losing those beautiful babies,its not only devastating but mentally and emotionally scarring..
And for all the critics Im about to receive,just let you know I had a mate whose child was stillborn...he committed suicide...if you think what she has caused JR and he should cop it on the chin,then he is a great man,if he smacked her in the head for telling such a horrendous lie,in my opinion good on him...


Wow......just wow.

Apparently no one condoning it according to tiger77

 

[Sco77y]

Well there is now more to this story, based on evidence.

There was no evidence provided in that story for either side! Everything in that story were allegations and claims of having evidence!

but she’s just lost a whole lot of credibility…

She most definitely has!

I’d say her parents are a primary source! But hey maybe 6 ex partners and her own family have banded together and are all out to get her for no reason.

I am not defending her one bit, just saying let the courts decide what did and didn't happen! There is still so much grey in this story and circumstances that could have occured that even if everything in tonight's report are true that wouldn't justify assault.

Totally agree in that it wouldn't justify assault, nothing would by its definition in law. And I'm not necessarily on either of their sides, and in fact would rather JR off our books tbh. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be any evidence on her side, so the accusation will be her word vs his. On JR's side, there is/will probably be presented in court, real evidence which significantly challenges her character and credibility so it's fairly safe to assume he will be found not guilty.

 

[Tiger5150]

Maybe after reading about the alleged web of decent this woman has spun with multiple men ...trial by media has been exposed for what it is , the worst part many here live by this doctrine and post accordingly
very sad ☹️!

Snake, you do realise that in defending JR from "trial by media", you just convicted the girl, in "trial by media"?

 

[Tiger77]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

:face_with_rolling_eyes:

I went back over the thread. I don't think anyone said it's ok to assault a woman. Since all we have seen so far is Josh getting angry and swearing I'd say that if the allegations about her are true then his anger has at least been put into perspective.

A lot of “it all makes sense” comments. = condoning it.

My point is that you are assuming they are condoning Josh being physically violent which we have no evidence that he was. The fact that you cherry picked one instance of someone saying they'd knock a woman out does not not change that.
I understand how you operate, I am old enough to have come across people like you many times over.

 

[twentyforty]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

Yeh smoke you got it!
We see this a lot. You attack the messenger or victim to water down the story.

 

[Cairnstigers]

however to charge someone with Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, there must be some evidence taken into account? Surely the “actual bodily harm”? would be considered?

There has to be evidence of an injury for the charge of actual bodily harm to be added.


That was my point. Mr Lawyer said that these charges are slapped on without evidence.

You also have to prove that Josh caused those injuries
I could injure myself and blame someone else
I'm not saying that's what she did but it's possible
Without proof it's all hearsay and he should be presumed innocent
And with her track record who is going to believe her

 

[Geo]

After the new grenade of public evidence, I reckon this topic is best avoided until the courts actually deal with it. Too much speculation still.


I agree and I question the logic behind opening it up. Was it because there was new evidence that seems to back JR up? If there was new evidence damning JR would the thread been opened back up?

Its still before the courts, its still untested, despite what everyone here seems to be thinking, he hasnt been exonerated by Ch9.

For the second time..it was re-opened after the revelations last night as there were 50 odd posts in another thread on the subject and it also began to leach into other threads as well..see two captains thread for example..

the hope was that discussion would be contained to this thread..

 

[Tiger5150]

Say for instance this female has actively tried to get Reynolds arrested/ruin his life etc and it all came out in that conversation that she recorded and heaven forbid he laid his hand on her.....***would he still be seen as the worst guy ever for laying his hands on her*** even though she did her best to screw his life up?

***I don't for one minute condone violence***.....but it is an interesting conversation....did the alleged abuse towards Reynolds trigger him? Would he have done it if he wasn't allegedly so clinically and callously duped?

Just trying to promote conversation.....

A real man would not lay a hand on a woman for any reason or any provocation. There is zero excuse for it, ever, full stop. A weak man assaults a woman, regardless of provocation.

to answer your question, if what this girl has supposedly done could trigger JR to assault her, I guess yes if JR is a weak man and there is no excuse for it.

SMH at what this thread has opened up. Between this thread and the coronavirus thread, we have had a whole new look at our fellow fans.

 

[Tiger5150]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

:face_with_rolling_eyes:

I went back over the thread. I don't think anyone said it's ok to assault a woman. Since all we have seen so far is Josh getting angry and swearing I'd say that if the allegations about her are true then his anger has at least been put into perspective.

Mate re-read, there have been at least two posters say it would be ok to assault her based on what Ch9 said she did.

Lots of "I dont condone violence,,,,BUT,,,," going on here.

 

[Tiger77]

Anyway, I'm off to comment in my other favourite thread; Policitcs

 

[Tiger77]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

:face_with_rolling_eyes:

I went back over the thread. I don't think anyone said it's ok to assault a woman. Since all we have seen so far is Josh getting angry and swearing I'd say that if the allegations about her are true then his anger has at least been put into perspective.


Mate re-read, there have been at least two posters say it would be ok to assault her based on what Ch9 said she did.

Lots of "I dont condone violence,,,,BUT,,,," going on here.

Two doesn't account for "a lot" as old mate put it. I'd say the vast majority have expressed that they don't condone violence but the anger shown in the short clip we have seen has been put into perspective...if true.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

I hope the club purchases the White Ribbon socks for our teams to wear in all grades. This whole issue continues to bring negative publicity. We test need to .move on from this but I don't know what that would look like.

 

[Tiger5150]

however to charge someone with Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, there must be some evidence taken into account? Surely the “actual bodily harm”? would be considered?

There has to be evidence of an injury for the charge of actual bodily harm to be added.


That was my point. Mr Lawyer said that these charges are slapped on without evidence.

You also have to prove that Josh caused those injuries
I could injure myself and blame someone else
I'm not saying that's what she did but it's possible
Without proof it's all hearsay and he should be presumed innocent
And with her track record who is going to believe her

I didnt make any point about JR's guilt or innocence. My new best mate YOT made a post saying that the police slap these charges without evidence. I merely made the point that there would at least have to be evidence to place that specific charge. You can not be charged with Assault cuasing actual bodily harm without evidence of actual bodily harm. Of course then it has to be proven as to the cause of it.

 

[balmain boy]

It would be seem based on the recently leaked info that she would see some jail time for fraud. This isn't a one off, she's targetted multiple vulnerable targets to exploit them.

She's seemingly faked ultrasounds and many other things to many people over many years. Who's to say she didn't injure herself too? With recenet revelations is a serial manipulator she now has no credibility, and presumably no proof. Unless she happened to be videoing him at the time he allegedly hit her. It's only my opinion but i can't see Reynolds getting any further punishment, and he'll get his case pushed forward today.

He's been trialed by media, now she will be, the courts need to get this case sorted asap for all involved.

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

Breaking news Ray Hadley reporting Josh will be allowed to resume playing

 

[wokesmoke]

This forum don’t wanna convict JR based on hearsay but want to convict the victim based on hear say. And want to justify JR actions based on the hear say. What evidence you do have is the video of JR losing his mind over something seemingly trivial and threatening to give her the business. Forum members are mixing up 2 doffernet issues.

 

[Tiger5150]

Lots of victim blaming in here since last night. Just to clarify assaulting a woman is justified because her character is bad and she lied about stuff... got it.

:face_with_rolling_eyes:

I went back over the thread. I don't think anyone said it's ok to assault a woman. Since all we have seen so far is Josh getting angry and swearing I'd say that if the allegations about her are true then his anger has at least been put into perspective.


Mate re-read, there have been at least two posters say it would be ok to assault her based on what Ch9 said she did.

Lots of "I dont condone violence,,,,BUT,,,," going on here.

Two doesn't account for "a lot" as old mate put it. I'd say the vast majority have expressed that they don't condone violence but the anger shown in the short clip we have seen has been put into perspective...if true.

Two is two too many.

Without trying to be a pedant, you said *"I went back over the thread. I don’t think anyone said it’s ok to assault a woman.* " and *"My point is that you are assuming they are condoning Josh being physically violent which we have no evidence that he was"* when Smoke & I both pointed to TrueTiger saying if *"he smacked her in the head for telling such a horrendous lie,in my opinion good on him…"*

I cant imagine a much clearer example of condoning violence against a woman. There have been others with the "I dont condone violence ....but".

I agree with you 100% though that it puts his anger in the video into perspective but and this is a ***MASSIVE BUT*** only if at the point of that video, he knew about the deception. If he didnt know what was going on at that point then that is not an excuse and there is no evidence that he knew in that video. in that video there is lots of talk about his anger for walking in on him in the bathroom, but if I was in his shoes and I knew about the deception, I wouldnt be yelling at her about walking into my room, Id be calling her a lying piece of work and referencing much bigger issues than busting into the bathroom. Personally I dont think he knows at that point.

 

[twentyforty]

however to charge someone with Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, there must be some evidence taken into account? Surely the “actual bodily harm”? would be considered?

There has to be evidence of an injury for the charge of actual bodily harm to be added.


That was my point. Mr Lawyer said that these charges are slapped on without evidence.

You also have to prove that Josh caused those injuries
I could injure myself and blame someone else
I'm not saying that's what she did but it's possible
Without proof it's all hearsay and he should be presumed innocent
And with her track record who is going to believe her

Your logic makes sense to me,
However,
I think you’ll find the laws regarding DV have changed. The victim needs only to make a statement . Then police charge the accused. Only the accused appears before the court to prove their innocence.