Bruce Francis

[Tiger2709]

About July 2011:A disgruntled ex-Newcastle rugby league player’s girlfriend dobbed her ex in for taking pills and the ACC decided to investigate it. At about the same time (27 July 2011) Hird asked an ASADA official about peptypes. He didn't know they were called peptides. The ASADA official told his boss about Hird's inquiry and ASADA notified Brett Clothier at the AFL.

29 July 2011: Clothier phoned Essendon’s general manager – football operation, Paul Hamilton, and asked him to bring Hird to AFL House. Calling Hamilton indicates Clothier / AFL knew Hamilton was higher up the ladder than Hird. Hamilton was on the EFC executive and Hird wasn’t.

Your making a lot of assumptions there, are you saying Hird contacted ASADA because he wanted to know what peptypes were after reading about them in the newspaper, if he talked to ASADA after reading the article about the rugby player wouldn't he have then realised they were called peptides not peptypes?

Not sure of the relevance of calling Hamilton, if he was the GM then he would be higher up the ladder than the coach, the coach is usually head of all football related things GM is General Manager of all club related things, Hirds interest in "peptypes" would be an issue for the club as a whole as we now know.

 

[old55]

Guys

As you know I am almost an ‘atheist’. Apart from Tony Nolan QC, Chip Le Grand, Tracey Holmes, Alan Jones and Graham Cornes, I have had no faith in the media or any of the legal participants including Justice Middleton, Garry Downes, Burnside, Grace, Hargreaves, Dillon, Hardie or anyone on ASADA’s team from the janitor up to the hopelessly out of their depth CEOs.

I have forced fed you like little babies examples of ASADA changing a witnesses’ evidence; omitting evidence; fabricating evidence; lying; accepting evidence from a key witnesses, which the investigators knew was wrong, etcetera

Now we have today’s debacle where Chip Le Grand has quoted Nima Alavi saying that ASADA tried to persuade him to sign an affidavit which they knew was false.

If there is an ounce of decency in any of you, you should be demanding that your editors write a front page story insisting the case be dismissed immediately.

I know enough about the law that perjury is a gaolable offence. Hopefully, trying to persuade someone to knowingly commit perjury carries the same penalty.

Bruce Francis

this is satire right? it's hard to tell anymore in this saga so much crazy stuff has happened.

 

[Bombfire]

Perhaps Alavi and Charter could have attended the tribunal where they would have had an opportunity to put their "truth" out there. Without them there, I guess they'll have to go by the transcripts and recordings of what was actually said.

The EFC Players defence is a disgrace. No tribunal can rely on the fairy tales and coincidences it presents to be legitimate.

The manipulation and misrepresntation by ASADA of information provided to them makes their case an unequivocal disgrace and makes a mockery of the notion "model litigant". Model abuser of process more like it.

 

[DonsRule]

A government minister is a terrible place for it to go. They don't investigate corruption, and actually should be kept separate from any possible criminal investigations. How about the police?

Also, ministers cannot just unilaterally give permission for confidential documents to be be published, nor can they indicate he wouldn't be prosecuted if he did publish. That would, in fact, be corrupt.

Who has the power to launch a proper investigation into ASADA if they have acted improperly though? State police I doubt. AFP, maybe. I think some of it may potantially go beyond the realmes of the police, Labour Ministers with their reguar check up and notes on the investigation.

 

[Masterschaft]

My first (and possibly last) post. I have been following these pages for many months, but did not feel as though I knew enough to comment knowledgeably, and so I haven't.

But I had a desperate desire to find out what really went on, and this I thought was the best place to look.

I didn't want a purely Essendon view, I wanted an adult debate.

I am deeply disappointed in the treatment of Bruce Francis, who had access to more information than probably any of us. Certainly, his emotive "Letter to the Editor" style is polarising and therefore would raise hackles, but he has access to and has thoroughly analysed arguably more information than any of us and I would have liked him to be able to answer some probing questions and defend his opinions.

As an aside, there is a reason why scientific papers are never written in the first person, and it is because you must only discuss the facts, and provide logical reasoning and data without the addition of emotional or personal language to back up any conclusions. I think Bruce would have gained better reception generally if he had been able to avoid the emotive language. I personally was wary of taking his conclusions at face value, as deeply satisfying as they were to read at times.

Hearing about his personal situation has helped me understand why he has come to be so invested in this despite his non-interest in AFL previously.

Which is why I am so PISSED at the behaviour of some of the posters on this board who have attacked his motivations and Chelseacarlton contributed nothing to the debate but simply posted rude comments about his test career. (I consider it highly unlikely that you ever represented your country in anything, and even if you had you should have the personal experience to respect the fact that he did.)

It was only a few weeks ago that an Essendon BF poster tragically committed suicide. Many sympathetic posts came from supporters of all stripes. People talked about the need for looking out for others.

Bruce himself said he was not suicidal, but he hopes every day not to wake up, and the task of analysing the interim report gave him a reason to get out of bed after 12 months. And look how he was treated! This forum is a zoo full of monkeys throwing s**t at each other. In this case it is the rabid "Essendon is guilty on all counts" crew (aka foam royalty) but some Essendon supporters have also been culpable in the past.

He has the courage to post under his own name and wrote some deeply personal stuff only to be derided, followed up by indifference, sarcasm and a small minded troll post. His personal post about caring for his terminally ill parents was partially in response to a jibe about patients he thought was aimed at him. I wouldn't bother posting again here if I was him either.

With regard to the two "lies" some claimed that they caught him out on:

Firstly I perfectly understand why Bruce may have been inconsistent when talking about whether he spoke to or emailed his source, as he doesn't want to reveal her (or him). In fact I find it a bit reassuring that he isn't very good at covering his tracks, he isn't a practiced liar.

Secondly the development with Alavi who according to a conversation with one ASADA investigator (I too thought the wording "one" slightly odd) believed he got TB4 from Charter, but according to his interview with Chip was not exactly sure what it was. This last was all that was referenced by Bruce and the ASADA revelation is I believe a relatively new development that he may not have been aware of. He posted previously composed material I have seen before, I don't believe he was lying. I am surprised nobody has considered Alavi may have had some legal advice prior to talking to Chip, not unlike the Essendon players. i.e. tell the truth, but do not speculate - only say what you know to be true. He may have been told and believed it was TB4 (which it looks like it was, not that it proves much yet in my opinion), but he can truthfully say he didn't "know".

We are the poorer without him and I despair at the quality of this debate.

Yeah, nah.

I have been interested in the facts that Bruce has been able to bring to light. I say this as an Essendon person desperate for those facts - we all are. But then Bruce comes out throwing punches in every direction on the basis of positions that are never properly argued or justified.

The latest, which I've read on the Essendon forum, is now Bruce has lost all faith in Julian Burnside, because "Burnside should have been able to persuade Little that Essendon had an unloseable case with the AFL last year, and because he didn't, Little capitulated and breached his fiduciary duties to the members" etc etc.

I mean where do you even start in trying to unpack the layers of bullshit tied up in that series of statements...

 

[BlueWorld]

Where the discredit is warranted, the public needs to know. We need journos who report facts, not journos who are puppets.

Agreed so we don't need Murdoch puppet Le Grand.

 

[BlueWorld]

The manipulation and misrepresntation by ASADA of information provided to them makes their case an unequivocal disgrace and makes a mockery of the notion "model litigant". Model abuser of process more like it.

Please supply proof of that. Stop swallowing everything Chip writes.

 

[fabulousphil]

Many on here can't see the forest for the trees.
Leave aside Alavi's credibility and what he did or didn't know about what he compounded.
Le Grand's article in today's Australian is important because it casts doubt on any evidence ASADA presents.
By my count, that is now 6 individuals (Charter, Alavi, Suki Hobson and 3 Cronulla officials quoted in the summary of evidence presented to Cronulla players when trying to convince them to take a deal) who have either refused to sign records of interview because ASADA has distorted what they really said, to suit their story, or have claimed, in the case of the 3 Cronulla officials, that ASADA misrepresented what they said at their interview, for the same purpose.
It is clear that it is ASADA's modus operandi to put words in the mouth of its "witnesses" to try to bolster its story.
As well, it is established that ASADA refuses to hand over full documentation of its evidence to allow an assessment of how it has "cherry picked" bits to suit its story, but left out other bits which assist the players' defence.
ASADA is a disgrace.
No tribunal can rely on the evidence it presents to be legitimate.
Hopefully this tribunal will see it this way.

ASADA and the tactics they use and are continuing to use are a absolute disgrace.

Beyond a joke.

Verballed, fitted up, stitched up etc etc springs to mind.

One thing i will say is the number of posters on this board that refuse to see reason or as you mentioned forest for the trees is nowhere near as big as what is was several months ago.

 

[Bombfire]

Please supply proof of that. Stop swallowing everything Chip writes.

Stop choking on everything Chip Le Grande writes even though its unpalatable for you.

 

[Bombfire]

Agreed so we don't need Murdoch puppet Le Grand.

Vanilla

 

[Argy]

Complying with a legally enforceable employment contract is thumbing their noses is it?

You don't think the contract had a disrepute clause?

 

[imperial_oz]

Who has the power to launch a proper investigation into ASADA if they have acted improperly though? State police I doubt. AFP, maybe. I think some of it may potantially go beyond the realmes of the police, Labour Ministers with their reguar check up and notes on the investigation.

ACC. No worries. Bruce should give them all his 'evidence'

ASADA are toast now, right?

 

[Rhayader]

Who has the power to launch a proper investigation into ASADA if they have acted improperly though? State police I doubt. AFP, maybe. I think some of it may potantially go beyond the realmes of the police, Labour Ministers with their reguar check up and notes on the investigation.

Depends on jurisdiction, but AFP would be a good start.

 

[Tiger2709]

But the players got so huge in 3 weeks in November they couldn't have done it without teh druggzzzz!

You all complain about the treatment of Bruce and really he like everyone knows that if you come on to forums you will occasionally get some flak, then you post this rubbish, Sir Hugh posted a factual timeline which disputed another posters claim in regards the consent forms, why the needless and poor attempt at a put down, double standards or what?

Everyone on here at first deserves the respect that Bruce deserved, then if you start to type rubbish expect some flak, although out right personal attacks are not on and that's why the forums are moderated.

 

[andrewb]

Perhaps Alavi and Charter could have attended the tribunal where they would have had an opportunity to put their "truth" out there. Without them there, I guess they'll have to go by the transcripts and recordings of what was actually said.

The EFC Players defence is a disgrace. No tribunal can rely on the fairy tales and coincidences it presents to be legitimate.

Hahahahahahaaa you're off your nut.
EFC players defence only has to show that ASADA's prosecution is full of fairy tales and coincidences, which it will.
We ain't living in North Korea

 

[andrewb]

Many on here can't see the forest for the trees.
Leave aside Alavi's credibility and what he did or didn't know about what he compounded.
Le Grand's article in today's Australian is important because it casts doubt on any evidence ASADA presents.
By my count, that is now 6 individuals (Charter, Alavi, Suki Hobson and 3 Cronulla officials quoted in the summary of evidence presented to Cronulla players when trying to convince them to take a deal) who have either refused to sign records of interview because ASADA has distorted what they really said, to suit their story, or have claimed, in the case of the 3 Cronulla officials, that ASADA misrepresented what they said at their interview, for the same purpose.
It is clear that it is ASADA's modus operandi to put words in the mouth of its "witnesses" to try to bolster its story.
As well, it is established that ASADA refuses to hand over full documentation of its evidence to allow an assessment of how it has "cherry picked" bits to suit its story, but left out other bits which assist the players' defence.
ASADA is a disgrace.
No tribunal can rely on the evidence it presents to be legitimate.
Hopefully this tribunal will see it this way.

Ripping post.
Clearly some here are not interested in how a conviction is achieved, just whether it is achieved.

 

[DonsRule]

ACC. No worries. Bruce should give them all his 'evidence'

ASADA are toast now, right?

Depends if he trusted them? He he (rightly or wrongly) believed AD tipped Evans off.

Depends on jurisdiction, but AFP would be a good start.

AFP do sound like a fair point, beyond my level of law. Sometimes paranoia steps in rightly or wrongly too Would the AFP move in on one of their own while McDeitt was there (esp when he had a role with the ACC too)

People have different reasons for things, perhaps conections he had.

 

[Cronos]

The manipulation and misrepresntation by ASADA of information provided to them makes their case an unequivocal disgrace and makes a mockery of the notion "model litigant". Model abuser of process more like it.

There is no proof of manipulation or misrepresentation. There is proof of the accused wanting all evidence they provided thrown out.

The behaviour of the Essendon Football Club in this whole issue has been an absolute disgrace and makes a mockery of the notion of fair play.

"I'm very disappointed, shocked is probably the best word. As a coach I take full responsibility for what happens in our footy department. If there have been goings on within our football department that are not right we want to know."
James Hird, Feb 05, 2013

"[Over] the past five months, there's obviously been some truth put out there, but the constant innuendo, rhetoric, half-truths and probably lies that have been spun about the club, the players, the great people that work here, and the half-truths, rhetoric and lies that have been spun about myself, are very hurtful and very damaging."
James Hird, Jul 19, 2013

"I disagreed with what Mr Evans was going to say the morning he said it,"
"I was asked by the Essendon Football Club not to shirk the issue."
"I was told it would be better for the club if we went along this path."
James Hird, Aug 11, 2014

Well James, you've been active in the innuendo, rhetoric, half-truths and probably lies that have been spun about the AFL, the other clubs, and the great people who work for ASADA.

 

[fabulousphil]

ACC. No worries. Bruce should give them all his 'evidence'

ASADA are toast now, right?

Hopefully ASADA are called to account, quite a lot of instances where they have been found evidence and witness tampering IMO.

 

[Cronos]

Hahahahahahaaa you're off your nut.
EFC players defence only has to show that ASADA's prosecution is full of fairy tales and coincidences, which it will.
We ain't living in North Korea

If ASADA's prosecution consists of transcripts and recordings, how can you consider them fairy tales? There's nothing paraphrased or interpreted in a recording.

We're not living with the fairies at the bottom of the garden either.

 

[kfc1]

You all complain about the treatment of Bruce and really he like everyone knows that if you come on to forums you will occasionally get some flak, then you post this rubbish, Sir Hugh posted a factual timeline which disputed another posters claim in regards the consent forms, why the needless and poor attempt at a put down, double standards or what?

Everyone on here at first deserves the respect that Bruce deserved, then if you start to type rubbish expect some flak, although out right personal attacks are not on and that's why the forums are moderated.

Not putting down Hugh Percy, it was a dig at the other idiots who bang on about how huge the players got etc.

 

[Cronos]

Hopefully ASADA are called to account, quite a lot of instances where they have been found evidence and witness tampering IMO.

Quite a lot of instances where they have been accused of evidence and witness tampering (by people who have a lot to lose if caught out).

No evidence at this stage though, and isn't that what you demand of the other side? (or are you just trying to trash innocent people's reputations?)

 

[andrewb]

If ASADA's prosecution consists of transcripts and recordings, how can you consider them fairy tales? There's nothing paraphrased or interpreted in a recording.

We're not living with the fairies at the bottom of the garden either.

ASADA's prosecution is like a partially completed dot to dot, to finish it you have to make up your own dots.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Hahahahahahaaa you're off your nut.
EFC players defence only has to show that ASADA's prosecution is full of fairy tales and coincidences, which it will.
We ain't living in North Korea

do you think ASADA dubbed the tapes?
Wouldn't you like to be there and tell them they are full of s**t if you knew they were gunna just use the juicy bits?

 

[Cronos]

ASADA's prosecution is like a partially completed dot to dot, to finish it you have to make up your own dots.

...and you know this how?

Oh, that's right, you don't. You're just hoping that's the case.