Its criminal what happened at EssendonWe let criminals out of jail when they are appealing?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its criminal what happened at EssendonWe let criminals out of jail when they are appealing?
2 countsIts criminal what happened at Essendon
Its criminal what happened at Essendon
Just put alleged thru your postIs now the right time to mention the real criminals?
Exactly and there's no indication from Essendon that they ever want Dank to come clean.So how does he get there?
Asked this question a number of times now on what grounds can he, or any of the other players, sue Dank directly? I can think of some how the EFC may drag Dank into it but yet to have anyone give me valid grounds on how a player can.
We let criminals out of jail when they are appealing?
Does it? Didn't know. Just straight out or is some sort of bail still needed?Err, this happens often.
Does it? Didn't know. Just straight out or is some sort of bail still needed?
Although it could be read that if Essendon did have more records they would have provided them to hunterPersonally I like the end bit...
Barrister Anthony Young, for Essendon, told the court that given Mr Hunter had lost his case against the club it was a matter of law that he should pay their legal costs.
Professor Keyzer told the court Mr Hunter's lawyers had pursued their request for documents from Essendon because they expected a professional football club would have kept detailed records of what players had been injected with.
He said the documents produced by Essendon had been "remarkably inadequate" compared with the documents offered up by the AFL.
Associate Justice Mukhtar said he was bound by law to order Mr Hunter to pay Essendon's legal costs for the October 29 hearing as well as Wednesday's hearing.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/f...ts-program-20160210-gmqeea.html#ixzz3zjqYTOBw
Follow us: theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
Hunter technically lost his case against the club because EFC had no documents to be found... hence why he had to pay...With Hunter only paying the bare minimum IMO judge basically went, technically he lost.. but only because you guys stuffed up more and did not have records you should of had...
Although it could be read that if Essendon did have more records they would have provided them to hunter
People get bailed pending their appeal outcome.
No, which is why he didn't get an IN.This whole saga is inconsistent, did hal sign a consent form?
How many more of the remaining squad were in the same boat do you think? I also recall he was injected at Hypermed and no one knows what the hell that was. And the burning question did the young Daniher get jabbed? Yes I know he didn't get an IN, but neither did Hal.Just in from the other joint:
"I think you'll find he was left off the charge sheet because he wasn't asked to sign a consent form (IIRC, it wasn't he didn't sign, he wasn't asked to sign). A program outlier, if you like.
Think about that for a mo'. The consent forms were sold as providing full and frank disclosure, so the players could provide informed consent (all manure, of course, but that was the pitch).
But, young Hal, a rookie, was jabbed anyway. On that basis, I'd suggest he received lesser care than the 34.
Ooh, look, I see an argument worth putting."
The players know they are innocentSo EFC inject Hal with who knows what.
Hal discovers that some of the stuff might be dodgy.
Hal asks dodgy employer EFC what it was, EFC say I dunno.
Hal goes to court to ask EFC what they injected him whilst under there employ and they stump up inadequate detail.
EFC claim this as a win and seek costs from Hal for asking what the EFC injected into him.
What a dispicable club! Care for the players, yeah right!
Why is not the AFL supporting Hal in his action against EFC? Why are they not publicly chastising EFC for disregard to there players?
Where is the AFL players association, why are they not barking in rage outside court?Are they going to assist Hal with legal costs?
It all just smells so rotten.
It was.The players know they are innocent
there is an appeal
and danks said he has proof
at the end of the day workcover is a joke - this club should have been fined millions
The EFC supporters response to Hal an even his mother wanting to know what was pumped into him has been disgraceful.#BackOurBoys #UnlessTheySue #ThenShoveThemUnderBuses
it was in reference to workcover which fined them a minute $305,000It was.
Did he sign a consent for to this effect?so he knew he was receiving TB4, a potentially dangerous ped which he and other players deliberately hid from the club doctor. Yet now he wants to know about the other potentially dangerous drugs? Ahhh isnt that why he should have included the club doctor in the first place??
So EFC inject Hal with who knows what.
Hal discovers that some of the stuff might be dodgy.
Hal asks dodgy employer EFC what it was, EFC say I dunno.
Hal goes to court to ask EFC what they injected him whilst under there employ and they stump up inadequate detail.
EFC claim this as a win and seek costs from Hal for asking what the EFC injected into him.
What a dispicable club! Care for the players, yeah right!
Why is not the AFL supporting Hal in his action against EFC? Why are they not publicly chastising EFC for disregard to there players?
Where is the AFL players association, why are they not barking in rage outside court?Are they going to assist Hal with legal costs?
It all just smells so rotten.
You could ask the dope peddling cheats at your club; but they 'lost' their records.Im confused why:
- a 'team wide' doping program didnt involve every player. Surely if you were going to dope the team every player should be on board, otherwise you risk players who are not involved leaving the club and whistleblowing
- Hal didnt receive TB4. Surely if the purpose of the program was to dope players TB4 would have been the cornerstone of Dank's program. Why was Hal on a program and not on TB4?
So Hal was on TB4? Why doeant he know this given CAS claim the players knew?