this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
33 points (97.1% liked)

Australia

3677 readers
164 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
Fluid@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
33
Australian woman discovers fake Instagram wedding was real (www.bbc.com)
submitted 21 hours ago by Zagorath@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 14 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

A woman in Australia has annulled her marriage after realising that a fake wedding ceremony she took part in for a social media stunt was in fact real.

What an absolutely wild story this was. Disappointed in the BBC's reporting though. No mention of the groom's side of this. Not what he said to the court (or mention that he did not speak in court), nor anything he might have posted on social media later (surely the drama of all this would have been worth it for more clicks?), nor any mention of an attempt to reach out to him to comment on the story itself.

Not that I think it would exonerate him even slightly, but I just want to see how he could possibly try to defend this. It would have added to the amusement, as well as just being basic good journalistic practices.

[–] Echinoderm@aussie.zone 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Here's the link to the case should you be interested: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC1F/2024/674.html

To be fair to the BBC, most of the questions you raise don't have good answers. There doesn't seem to be a lot of the other side of the story to report. The judge mentions at several points that the purported groom gave only vague and incomplete evidence, and that he failed to provide details about key issues.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 9 hours ago

most of the questions you raise don’t have good answers

I mean, that's fine. But it's a standard inclusion in an article, even if all you have to say is "the groom did not respond to our request for comment." It makes it clear that you tried and he was not interested in explaining himself. As it's written, it looks like they just couldn't be bothered doing journalism.

Anyway, thanks for sharing that. It's a wild read.

Minor side note:

When giving their evidence either viva voce or by affidavit, the applicant and the respondent were duty bound to comply with the stipulations in Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd[6] where the High Court held that a witness must tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth

How is it that the citation for "a witness must tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" only 13 years old‽

It must not be overlooked that I am not required to accept evidence, even uncontroverted evidence, if that evidence is contrary to the way events are likely to have occurred

Tell that to the High Court in Pell...