THE US presidential debates are over with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton facing off against each other for the third and final time.
The debate, moderated by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, saw the two presidential hopefuls exchange barbs in a feisty face off, but without a handshake exchanged between them.
It was Trump’s final chance to prove to Americans that he has the temperament and ability to win the White House race.
It was also a chance for Clinton to appeal to younger voters who still see her rival as a chance for change.
The 90-minute debate which covered the economy, social issues and foreign policy among other issues pitted the businessman against the politically experienced Clinton.
But who really came out on top?
According to Aaron Connelly, a research fellow at the Lowy Institute for International Policy, Clinton fared better when it came to policy.
He said Trump still managed to deliver a few knocks to his rival, although stressed the real winner wouldn’t emerge until polls came out in a few days time.
Mr Connelly said this final debate was similar to the first in that it showed Trump was his own worst enemy.
Not only did he allow himself to be baited by Clinton at several points but he played into her rhetoric that he doesn’t have the temperament to be Commander in Chief, he said.
Trump also didn’t do himself any favours with women voters calling Clinton “a nasty woman” while talking about winding back abortion rights.
FOR much of his nine-day trial in the Brisbane Supreme Court, Gable Tostee appeared less a man on trial for murder and more a guy casually waiting for a bus.
If the 30-year-old Gold Coaster charged with the murder of his Tinder date Warriena Wright in August, 2014, had any concerns about the potential, imminent loss of his liberty, he certainly never showed it.
Each day that he sat in the Brisbane Supreme Court dock, his face betrayed no hint of any nerves.
Tostee had pleaded not guilty and clearly genuinely believed in his innocence.
He clearly had faith the key piece of evidence at trial, the secret recording he made that captured the final hour of his date with Ms Wright, would be the means by which the jury would exonerate him.
He had good reason.
At the conclusion of the Crown’s case last Thursday, in the absence of the jury, his defence barrister — the high profile Saul Holt, QC, who represented Jill Meagher’s rapist and murderer, Adrian Bayley, pro bono in his appeals against multiple rape convictions — made a no case submission.
It could easily have seen the jury discharged and the case thrown out of court, without the need for a verdict.