Dank's D-day looms....April 10th

[jenny61_99]

In the grand scheme of things I agree with you. Hird having organised the meetings (listed as fact, by some on here without evidence) was used as a foundational proof of Hird's intention to 'cheat'. No doubt things turned to shite after this point (and this is my own opinion) I don't think Hird had intended to cross the line (although the evidence is that the program eventually did).

Ok here's a question for you. Hird knew charter was convicted for drug dealing. He also most certainly knew charter used peds and supplied peds to athletes. What do you think he thought about charters presence at this 'unplanned' meeting?

 

[I Rock]

In the grand scheme of things I agree with you. Hird having organised the meetings (listed as fact, by some on here without evidence) was used as a foundational proof of Hird's intention to 'cheat'. No doubt things turned to shite after this point (and this is my own opinion) I don't think Hird had intended to cross the line (although the evidence is that the program eventually did).

Maybe. Maybe not. However what is something that you could heavily suggest didn't happen. Was Hird saying; Steve don't take this the wrong way as we have history, however you are a convicted drug dealer. You have a reputation for PEDs and masking agents. I don't want you to have any involvement however small it may be, with the Essendon Football Club or me as the coach of the club.

Now imagine how much better a position Hird would have been in had that happend.

You and others can try and argue who organized what and why. However as it stands evidence points to a convicted drug dealer who specializes in PEDs and masking agents, supplying raw compounds to Alavi who chemistry it all up for the Essendon program. Try to work out how that alone causes issues.

 

[Duckworth]

Your post about having to provide evidence the meeting was in a meeting/conference room to show Hird planned it was delusional and "Lol" worthy.

Credibility, on a forum. Lol worthy again

There is NO evidence to suggest that Hird planned any of the meetings. Yet, in your words you believe "Hird inteneded to meet Charter". What I was pointing out was because of the nature of the meetings being poolside it points to the meetings being 'unplanned' (at least from Hirds point of view). The boardroom would have at least been some evidence of 'planning'. It seems sarcasm relating to the complete lack of evidence for Hird planning the meetings is not understood on here unless it is accompanied with a 'lol'.

 

[Duckworth]

Ok here's a question for you. Hird knew charter was convicted for drug dealing. He also most certainly knew charter used peds and supplied peds to athletes. What do you think he thought about charters presence at this 'unplanned' meeting?

There are a few assumptions in that.... but I'll work with you. I think he would want Reid to be there, then not plan to meet him again. That is my best guess, because (according to the reports of those there) that is what happened.

 

[Armchair Critic]

There is NO evidence to suggest that Hird planned any of the meetings. Yet, in your words you believe "Hird inteneded to meet Charter". What I was pointing out was because of the nature of the meetings being poolside it points to the meetings being 'unplanned' (at least from Hirds point of view). The boardroom would have at least been some evidence of 'planning'. It seems sarcasm relating to the complete lack of evidence for Hird planning the meetings is not understood on here unless it is accompanied with a 'lol'.

Which boadroom is this, the one who had no idea of Reids concerns/letter or the one who still can't tell us what substances were used.

The meeting being poolside points to it being unplanned does it. That is very naive of you if you believe that.
Drug dealers rarely meet in conference rooms , just pointing that out for you

 

[MagpieJo]

Sweet Jesus

How many armaggedons are there

 

[jenny61_99]

There are a few assumptions in that.... but I'll work with you. I think he would want Reid to be there, then not plan to meet him again. That is my best guess, because (according to the reports of those there) that is what happened.

And yet he did meet with him again, without doc Reid.

 

[yaco55]

The only communication is when ASADA decide they have enough evidence to make a formal allegation or allegations. ASADA does not send updates of evidence or information to the panel during its investigation. They may send new evidence if it comes to light after they have sent the formal allegations to the panel. This is how it works.

You are spot on with your posts, and you more eloquently addressed my concerns. We have to hope that the article in The Herald Sun is wrong ( which is likely ) or I'd have serious misgivings about the process. Though you will find that the HRD has a low tolerance for Process.

 

[Armchair Critic]

You are spot on with your posts, and you more eloquently addressed my concerns. We have to hope that the article in The Herald Sun is wrong ( which is likely ) or I'd have serious misgivings about the process. Though you will find that the HRD has a low tolerance for Process.

Um you have to be kidding me right. Do you think Police only deal with the DPP once their investigations are complete or do you think they are involved during the whole process.

 

[yodellinhank]

Um you have to be kidding me right. Do you think Police only deal with the DPP once their investigations are complete or do you think they are involved during the whole process.

Police complete a preliminary brief before they have anything to do with the DPP.

 

[BigJoeD_]

Um you have to be kidding me right. Do you think Police only deal with the DPP once their investigations are complete or do you think they are involved during the whole process.

This would be akin to the police dealing with the judge in charge of the case, not the DPP.
Surely an abuse of process if true

 

[nineteen eighty]

That's the exact scene that came to mind. Must be showing my age. Classic scene!

 

[Gigantor]

Sweet Jesus

How many armaggedons are there

1/ about 14 months worth
2/ and counting

 

[Sydney Bloods]

So has dank been drawn and quartered yet?

 

[jenny61_99]

That's the exact scene that came to mind. Must be showing my age. Classic scene!

I wondered how many would get it.

 

[BigJoeD_]

I wondered how many would get it.

Ruprecht!!

 

[jenny61_99]

Ruprecht!!

Gold star for you BigJ!

 

[Laphroaig]

Try and make the gigantic intellectual leap and actually read and understand a discussion. You have come in on a discussion about the trials - something that seems to have escaped you.

THE PARTIAL TRIALS. Which hasn't escaped me at all.

 

[Laphroaig]

There isn't anything to support that. Charters does say So Hird can't have 'intended' to meet him - according to EFC, Hird and Charter, nor did he expect him to be there. So by all reports of those that were there, you're wrong.

FWIW I think Dank had organised Charter to be there to try and convince Hird. But Hird intending to meet Charters there is wrong according to all involved.

edit: I'll make this clear. Hird said he wasn't expecting to see Charters, Charters said Hird wasn't expecting to see him. Your post suggests you know more than the people who were actually there and is deluded.

Perhaps you might broaden your horizons and take notice of more than the one sketchy article, heavily legalled, before you huff and puff about all reports. Inheriting arguments from Mxett can be hazardous. He knowingly misrepresents.

 

[Baldur]

Any time anyone pops up on this board who don't go for Essendon and don't go for the lynch mob they are Ian Hanke. Conspiracy theory much?

Frankly I have learned to be sus of any account with a begin date after Feb 2013. And even a couple of very low post accounts before then. Many are not doubt legit but some are so over the top on eitheir side or pushing some barrow that one has to wonder if other agenda's are not being followed. Or simple trolling on an elias account.

 

[Armchair Critic]

This would be akin to the police dealing with the judge in charge of the case, not the DPP.
Surely an abuse of process if true

How do you compare them to the judge in Charge of the case, the ADRVP do not determine Innocence or guilt , they just determine whether there is sufficient evidence for an infraction notice to be issued.

 

[jenny61_99]

How do you compare them to the judge in Charge of the case, the ADRVP do not determine Innocence or guilt , they just determine whether there is sufficient evidence for an infraction notice to be issued.

Surely by entering them on to the Register of Findings, they believe the athlete/personnel is most likely to be guilty after considering evidence from ASADA and the person involved (if they choose to respond, which Dank hasn't)? They don't enter someone on to the register if they think they are innocent.

• The ADRVP reviews ASADA’s processes and all relevant evidence in a matter and makes decisions as to whether to enter an athlete or support person’s details onto the Register of Findings if it believes that a person has possibly committed an ADRV.

ie. If they don't believe they've possibly committed an ADRV, they won't enter the person onto the register.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Surely by entering them on to the Register of Findings, they believe the athlete/personnel to be guilty after considering evidence from ASADA and the person involved (if they choose to respond, which Dank hasn't)? They don't enter someone on to the register if they think they are innocent.

Yes but they are not the actual Judge of the case, that would be the sports tribunal, they are just deciding whether the evidence is there for it to proceed to the next level

 

[jenny61_99]

Yes but they are not the actual Judge of the case, that would be the sports tribunal, they are just deciding whether the evidence is there for it to proceed to the next level

just edited my post. Think it makes more sense now.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Surely by entering them on to the Register of Findings, they believe the athlete/personnel is most likely to be guilty after considering evidence from ASADA and the person involved (if they choose to respond, which Dank hasn't)? They don't enter someone on to the register if they think they are innocent.

• The ADRVP reviews ASADA’s processes and all relevant evidence in a matter and makes decisions as to whether to enter an athlete or support person’s details onto the Register of Findings if it believes that a person has possibly committed an ADRV.

ie. If they don't believe they've possibly committed an ADRV, they won't enter the person onto the register.

The ADRVP don't actually determine whether the person is innocent or guilty, that is up to the sports tribunal.The ADRVP decide whether it should proceed to the next step.
YACO compared them to being the equivalent of a judge, that is not correct.

Edit: sorry it was BigJoeD