Although it is probably best not to be called one, the Australian word larrikin has no real pejorative connotations today. That was not always the case. In 1886, a gang of larrikins know as the Waterloo Push committed an outrageous gang-rape on the sixteen year old Mary Jane Hicks. This documentary reconstructs the resulting trial that saw no fewer than eleven youths in the dock, nine of whom were convicted and sentenced to death. Eventually, only four were executed, but the situation in Sydney at that time was similar to that in India six years ago with the horrendous gang-rape of a young woman committed brazenly by a group of miscreants against whom these wretches pale in comparison.
Not mentioned here is the fact that one defendant faced a separate trial that resulted in a fourteen year sentence augmented with fifty lashes.
In the 1970s, a series of misnamed rape shield laws were instituted in many countries; this trial is one of many that demonstrate clearly they are not needed. The defence attempted to blacken the character of the victim by claiming she was not a virgin. Mary admitted she'd had "connection" with a man when she was fourteen; at that time, the age of consent in Australia was fourteen. The judge was unimpressed remarking in effect that even the most morally reprehensible of women was entitled to the protection of the law, which clearly Mary wasn't. Attacking the character of any witness in such a manner is always risky in a jury trial, especially when that witness is the victim, and when there is no real dispute about her victimhood.
"The Mount Rennie Outrage" is clearly a social document rather than a mere crime documentary; to the extent it is the latter, it succeeds.
Not mentioned here is the fact that one defendant faced a separate trial that resulted in a fourteen year sentence augmented with fifty lashes.
In the 1970s, a series of misnamed rape shield laws were instituted in many countries; this trial is one of many that demonstrate clearly they are not needed. The defence attempted to blacken the character of the victim by claiming she was not a virgin. Mary admitted she'd had "connection" with a man when she was fourteen; at that time, the age of consent in Australia was fourteen. The judge was unimpressed remarking in effect that even the most morally reprehensible of women was entitled to the protection of the law, which clearly Mary wasn't. Attacking the character of any witness in such a manner is always risky in a jury trial, especially when that witness is the victim, and when there is no real dispute about her victimhood.
"The Mount Rennie Outrage" is clearly a social document rather than a mere crime documentary; to the extent it is the latter, it succeeds.