Josh Reynolds

[Cultured_Bogan]

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.

Doubling down I see.

He turned himself and was still charged. Regardless of what you may think of the woman, the results of that night had nothing to do with the story from yesterday. And as I said, regardless, putting your hands on a female and being highly aggressive isn’t warranted. And if you condone it and agree it’s justified then I feel sorry for your missus and daughters if you have any

You don't know anything about me. Not once have I condoned domestic violence, I even said the video was not becoming, irrespective of the DV accusations.

You have made unsubstantiated accusations all the way through this thread about something that is before the courts. You know no more or less than I do about this. I have not cast aspersions either way, in fact I have said wait until he has his day in court when this will all be put before a judge and jury and they can ascertain what has taken place, to which the findings will be made public.

The story about the girl last night is not a good look on her part either. There's multiple people coming out saying she has swindled and lied her way to money. This will obviously be testified to and countered in court so I am not going to condemn her either because to do that would be contradictory to my views on Josh's pending trial.

I'll tell you one thing I'm not, I'm not some rumourmonger who takes any whisper he hears and frames it as inside info on a footy forum. A broken clock is right more often than you. You're a continual embarrassment to yourself and you have the hide to show up here and question the integrity of others.

Jog on.

 

[Tiger77]

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.

I don't think that's true about the majority of forum members but you'd have to admit the amount of evidence (yet uproven as far as we know) stacked up against her does at least give people a reason to make an assumption that possibly all is not what it was originally portrayed as. I understand though that it's easier to make bold sweeping statements about the forum so that you get a reaction.

I'm guessing if someone did all of those alleged things to you, you'd merely give them a pat on the back and say "ahhhh good one! You got me this time! Now get out of here you trickster you!"

 

[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.


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.

Your whole last paragraph is a MASSIVE BUT. If you were in his shoes and she did all of the alleged things, you don't really know how you'd react but I'd assume you wouldn't be laughing.

 

[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.

Your whole last paragraph is a MASSIVE BUT. If you were in his shoes and she did all of the alleged things, you don't really know how you'd react but I'd assume you wouldn't be laughing.

But if you didnt know, you wouldnt know. How do we know that he knows in that video? There is nothing to suggest that he does. He might, he might not.

Of course if he does it explains his anger, but if he didnt know at that point, it doesnt.

It is impossible to know and therefore you cant absolve him. If you were in his shoes and you knew everything that was in the Ch9 report, would you be talking about her "scaring you" as she burst into the bathroom or would you be calling the cops to get her out of your house?

 

[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.

Doubling down I see.

He turned himself and was still charged. Regardless of what you may think of the woman, the results of that night had nothing to do with the story from yesterday. And as I said, regardless, putting your hands on a female and being highly aggressive isn’t warranted. And if you condone it and agree it’s justified then I feel sorry for your missus and daughters if you have any

You don't know anything about me. Not once have I condoned domestic violence, I even said the video was not becoming, irrespective of the DV accusations.

You have made unsubstantiated accusations all the way through this thread about something that is before the courts. You know no more or less than I do about this. I have not cast aspersions either way, in fact I have said wait until he has his day in court when this will all be put before a judge and jury and they can ascertain what has taken place, to which the findings will be made public.

The story about the girl last night is not a good look on her part either. There's multiple people coming out saying she has swindled and lied her way to money. This will obviously be testified to and countered in court so I am not going to condemn her either because to do that would be contradictory to my views on Josh's pending trial.

I'll tell you one thing I'm not, I'm not some rumourmonger who takes any whisper he hears and frames it as inside info on a footy forum. A broken clock is right more often than you. You're a continual embarrassment to yourself and you have the hide to show up here and question the integrity of others.

Jog on.

Sure champ. You type a lot but don’t say much

 

[twentyforty]

Look , don’t get me wrong, I do not condone DV even though I was victim myself growing up in a horror camp where belting s were dished out systematically each fortnight. But, how do you feel about a light gentle beating with a stick? Just as you would do to move on a camel say?

 

[wokesmoke]

So many i don’t condone DV but..... I’ll tell ya what, if you start off with I don’t condone DV then start on variables where it’s “ok” then you do condone it and you’re pathetic

 

[Sco77y]

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.

It's not quite hearsay when your own parents are backing up everybody's sentiments, but even if you ignore that, there are likely documents including medical that back those up. Obviously we don't know that 100% for sure, but it really sounds like these do exist and will be presented in court. Let's wait and see..

 

[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.


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.

Your whole last paragraph is a MASSIVE BUT. If you were in his shoes and she did all of the alleged things, you don't really know how you'd react but I'd assume you wouldn't be laughing.


But if you didnt know, you wouldnt know. How do we know that he knows in that video? There is nothing to suggest that he does. He might, he might not.

Of course if he does it explains his anger, but if he didnt know at that point, it doesnt.

It is impossible to know and therefore you cant absolve him. If you were in his shoes and you knew everything that was in the Ch9 report, would you be talking about her "scaring you" as she burst into the bathroom or would you be calling the cops to get her out of your house?

You said "know" so many times that it made my eyes bleed. It was like reading a Dr Seuss book.

Anyway, I haven't absolved anyone because I have no evidence that he did anything other than get angry and use language that wasn't very nice. I'm like MOST forum members who believe that if he did physically hurt her then he also has to take responsibility for that and be punished accordingly.

I don't know what I'd do if it was me. I'll ask my wife to do all of that to me and I'll get back to you.

 

[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.

It's not quite hearsay when your own parents are backing up everybody's sentiments, but even if you ignore that, there are likely documents including medical that back those up. Obviously we don't know that 100% for sure, but it really sounds like these do exist and will be presented in court. Let's wait and see..

Again, those accusations have nothing to do whether or not she was assaulted.

 

[twentyforty]

So many i don’t condone DV but..... I’ll tell ya what, if you start off with I don’t condone DV then start on variables where it’s “ok” then you do condone it and you’re pathetic

Just trying to make some light humour.
You people are getting a little too serious

 

[Tiger5150]

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.

It's not quite hearsay when your own parents are backing up everybody's sentiments, but even if you ignore that, there are likely documents including medical that back those up. Obviously we don't know that 100% for sure, but it really sounds like these do exist and will be presented in court. Let's wait and see..

100% agree on the wait and see, let the court decide, but I think you are conflating two issues. Even if it is not hearsay, even if everything on the Ch9 report is 100% true, it is still possible that JR assaulted her. The fact that she is a mentally ill, vindictive nasty piece of work that has done horrible things to JR, would not absolve him or anyone of assault.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

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.

Doubling down I see.

He turned himself and was still charged. Regardless of what you may think of the woman, the results of that night had nothing to do with the story from yesterday. And as I said, regardless, putting your hands on a female and being highly aggressive isn’t warranted. And if you condone it and agree it’s justified then I feel sorry for your missus and daughters if you have any

You don't know anything about me. Not once have I condoned domestic violence, I even said the video was not becoming, irrespective of the DV accusations.

You have made unsubstantiated accusations all the way through this thread about something that is before the courts. You know no more or less than I do about this. I have not cast aspersions either way, in fact I have said wait until he has his day in court when this will all be put before a judge and jury and they can ascertain what has taken place, to which the findings will be made public.

The story about the girl last night is not a good look on her part either. There's multiple people coming out saying she has swindled and lied her way to money. This will obviously be testified to and countered in court so I am not going to condemn her either because to do that would be contradictory to my views on Josh's pending trial.

I'll tell you one thing I'm not, I'm not some rumourmonger who takes any whisper he hears and frames it as inside info on a footy forum. A broken clock is right more often than you. You're a continual embarrassment to yourself and you have the hide to show up here and question the integrity of others.

Jog on.


Sure champ. You type a lot but don’t say much

If you feel that way your comprehension must be fairly remedial then. At least what I say are my own thoughts and not regurgitated from elsewhere.

 

[Tiger77]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?

Nothing. It passes time.

 

[Tiger5150]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?

More than one thing can be true at once.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?

Nothing. It passes time.

Thanks for your honesty, pretty sad topic no matter how things pan out.

 

[Tiger77]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?

Nothing. It passes time.

Thanks for your honesty, pretty sad topic no matter how things pan out.

You're right mate. No one wins.

 

[old_man_tiger]

Since one side of this argument is - "see! You jumped the gun on hearsay" and the other side is "now you're jumping the gun on hearsay", and both are correct, can I ask what anyone actually hopes to gain by having this discussion on a forum?


More than one thing can be true at once.

I said that

 

[Tiger5150]

Apparently Toddy has just cleared Josh to play.

One thing I HATE about the NRL these days is the manipulation. For the millionth time this not a comment on JRs innocence or guilt, or that of his ex but does anyone think that it is a coincidence that the Ch9 report comes out the day before both his case and Greenburgs decision?