The HAL Hunter thread: Updated 10/2 - Must pay some costs. Now likely to sue, lodgement likely May.

[Satan]

We let criminals out of jail when they are appealing?

Its criminal what happened at Essendon

 

[Randomizor]

Its criminal what happened at Essendon

2 counts

 

[Just interested]

Its criminal what happened at Essendon

Is now the right time to mention the real criminals?

 

[Satan]

Is now the right time to mention the real criminals?

Just put alleged thru your post

 

[blackshadow]

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.

Exactly and there's no indication from Essendon that they ever want Dank to come clean.

 

[matthew_s]

We let criminals out of jail when they are appealing?

Err, this happens often.

 

[Randomizor]

Err, this happens often.

Does it? Didn't know. Just straight out or is some sort of bail still needed?

 

[matthew_s]

Does it? Didn't know. Just straight out or is some sort of bail still needed?

People get bailed pending their appeal outcome.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Personally 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

 

[Muggs]

Although it could be read that if Essendon did have more records they would have provided them to hunter

Yup, but than he would have well and truely lost, and EFC would of had a legitimate claim.

Should have better worded my comment.. Why did it take you three months to find nothing, on something you should of had.? He's not paying for those three months.

 

[Muggs]

People get bailed pending their appeal outcome.

Does some what depending on the circumstances... Much more common for minor crimes and those with no record than serious crimes and repeat offenders.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

A mill for Hal. A mill for his lawyer. That's the going price.

 

[jenny61_99]

This whole saga is inconsistent, did hal sign a consent form?

No, which is why he didn't get an IN.

 

[jenny61_99]

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."

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.

 

[Slartibartfast]

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.

 

[Mahlepi]

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.

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

 

[jenny61_99]

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

It was.

 

[Boxhead_31]

#BackOurBoys #UnlessTheySue #ThenShoveThemUnderBuses

The EFC supporters response to Hal an even his mother wanting to know what was pumped into him has been disgraceful.
Mrs Crameri is held up by them as a wonderful Mum because she checked Google for what was on the forms but Hal's Mum is a dingbat because she supports her sons actions to find out what he was injected with

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Could it be that this little victory for Essendon is what brings them undone in part 2? that is, now they have established in court that they don't know what they gave him, they can now be sued for that very fact?

The no records horseshit may just hit the fan and bury the bastards. Not exactly instant karma but the justice would be as poetic as could be.

 

[Mahlepi]

It was.

it was in reference to workcover which fined them a minute $305,000

 

[Boxhead_31]

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??

Did he sign a consent for to this effect?

 

[The_Wookie]

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.

Of all groups involved, the absolute lack of action from the AFLPA on this is what appalls me the most (after the actions at Essendon themselves)

 

[Slartibartfast]

All that matters is that it was an employer provided drug on an employer program.
If he understood what it was or not EFC are responsible.
The club and fans are showing thier ambivalent attitude to a former player who has done nothing wrong.
Fancy arguing that he knew what it was to justify an argument.
They have lost the plot

 

[B4Bear]

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?

You could ask the dope peddling cheats at your club; but they 'lost' their records.

 

[Armchair Critic]

So Hal was on TB4? Why doeant he know this given CAS claim the players knew?

All CAS claims only relate to the 34 players charged and have nothing to do with Hal Hunter