I understand it is still investigating. It might also be waiting for the outcome of the tribunal.
To be fair, the issues are slightly different in this, the tribunal case and any potential WorkSafe prosecution.
Mega Thread Hot Topic - Drugs and AFL
- Thread starter Power Raid
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I understand it is still investigating. It might also be waiting for the outcome of the tribunal.
To be fair, the issues are slightly different in this, the tribunal case and any potential WorkSafe prosecution.
Forzaport
Brownlow Medallist
Yeah, they're still investigating as far as I know. You'd think they'd be surely waiting for the outcome of the tribunal otherwise their investigation is proceeding embarrassingly slow. Most of what happened that would be relevant to WorkSafe is already in the public domain.
Moses01
Club Legend
Veteran
Port Adelaide - Jack Watts Player Sponsor 2018
Port Adelaide - Jesse Palmer Player Sponsor 2017
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Nathan Krakouer Player Sponsor 2015
Port Adelaide - Brendon AhChee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
- Feb 28, 2010
- 1,509
- 955
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ngs-large-again-over-afl-20150324-1m6stw.html
interesting article. Not sure about the J-Mac reference.
interesting article. Not sure about the J-Mac reference.
J-Mac was too much drink on a post season trip and a tragic case of that leading to being in the wrong place. That (the drink) is nothing of note for a post-season trip, outside of the end result in this case. It has no place being an article on some clubs having a culture of accepting drug abuse (and even at our nadir there were never the faintest whiffs of smoke along these lines, and these things always generate smoke if not fire). Otherwise a good article.
But then it's strongly suspected that a certain high flying forward who recently moved clubs had a 3rd strike conviction buried as he's a poster boy for AFL marketing. If there was a buck in it, the AFL hierarchy would sell their grandmothers to cannibals.
philreich
TheBrownDog
- Mar 2, 2014
- 58,533
- 147,411
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Just received this e-mail from a mate - make of it what you will:
Ross Stevenson said on this mornings Rumour File on 3AW that next weeks verdict for the 34 Bombers players will be "insufficient evidence" - i.e. Essendon will be able to field a full strength side in Round 1.
There has been plenty of rumours but am hoping this one is spot on.
Ross Stevenson said on this mornings Rumour File on 3AW that next weeks verdict for the 34 Bombers players will be "insufficient evidence" - i.e. Essendon will be able to field a full strength side in Round 1.
There has been plenty of rumours but am hoping this one is spot on.
I'll make of it that no one knows, and people are going to start rumours. There are only a few outcomes from this case, and that's one of them, so it's easy to start a rumour about.
Forzaport
Brownlow Medallist
It's extremely unlikely there'll be a leak from the tribunal judges. Like lotto jackpot odds of a leak. These are retired county court judges and a senior barrister. We won't know a thing until Tuesday.
Very true.I have a feeling a select few already know where it is going from a few snippets of info being spoken.
charcolechaddy
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 24, 2008
- 7,960
- 8,001
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- La lakers. Oakland Raiders, bunny’s
And what will be the out come if you where going by these snippets.
Seems that a not guilty due to insufficient evidence has been thrown around a bit on Friday.But then again that maybe me being to hopeful
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Everyone in the media trying to pick the outcome is just ******* guessing.
It's bizarre - as much as I know that we are the club most affected by this outcome, I still hope that the essendon players receive some sort of conviction and ban.
My personal ideal outcome would be a 6 month, backdated ban that results in a month of real time suspensions.
There will be such an unbelievable s**t storm of whingers if there is no conviction and the whole process has been pointless. Bottom line is - players must be protected from uncontrolled, unsupervised and dubious work place expectations.
My personal ideal outcome would be a 6 month, backdated ban that results in a month of real time suspensions.
There will be such an unbelievable s**t storm of whingers if there is no conviction and the whole process has been pointless. Bottom line is - players must be protected from uncontrolled, unsupervised and dubious work place expectations.
The standard of will be 'beyond reasonable doubt' and we still don't know for sure what they have been given? Or do we?
If the evidence is insufficient, then the players will receive no ban at all
If the evidence is insufficient, then the players will receive no ban at all
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Read this thread - use the search function the level of proof is comfortable satisfaction which is lower than reasonable doubt but more than balance of probabilities.
It also sounds like you have not read the WADA Code and/or the AFL Anti Doping Code.
you are correct
But considering the stigma of being labelled a drug cheat and the fact that it impacts significantly on their career. I would have thought that SOP would be 'beyond reasonable doubt'. perhaps im wrong
You're wrong. It's not.
well now i know.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Its got othing to do with the stigma but whats in the code. And the use of common sense.
you dont think its common sense that if you wish to say someone is a drug cheat that you would want there to be no doubt that the substance they took was illegal?
- Feb 5, 2004
- 14,967
- 9,904
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- sanfl - the mighty double magpies
Common sense would say that this whole saga should have finished ages ago.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Read this thread in full I have explained my position in this case and drugs in sport plenty of times. I have a very different starting point than ypu and most. Murders and Rapists get away with using beyond reasonable doubt to their fullest advantage. This about someone kicking a dead piece of animal around a field..
How come no player has had the guts to come out and demand that Dank, Charters and Alvi come and testify before the tribunal??? Its not a court of law so if they lie they wont go to jail or get a fine. The players silence says a fair bit.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Correct but lawyers, the massive amount of process built into PED investigations and the fact the key suppliers of drugs - chemical assistance for the squimish - refuse to testify and more importantly the AFL trying to manage the PR spin is why this has gone on for 2 years.
136 pages. Aint got time for that
I see what you are saying that sportsman shouldn't be subject to the some SOP as criminals. But players silence can not be used as evidence against them. Im have no idea what evidence ASADA has presented, but if there is insufficient proof that the alleged substances were injected into the players, what exactly are they being punished for?
Im not taking sides here. Im generally interested as I have no idea about this area of law
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
circumstancial evidence has both correctly and incorrectly put people behind bars. Its a legitimate tool to prosecute someone with. The evidence you want is what you get in a positive drug test. We dont have that so that's why we had this investigation that started off with evidence gathered by the Australian Crime Commission who has coercive powers to collect evidence but doesnt do the prosecuting.136 pages. Aint got time for that
I see what you are saying that sportsman shouldn't be subject to the some SOP as criminals. But players silence can not be used as evidence against them. Im have no idea what evidence ASADA has presented, but if there is insufficient proof that the alleged substances were injected into the players, what exactly are they being punished for?
Im not taking sides here. Im generally interested as I have no idea about this area of law
well it has made it impossible to predict what is going to happen on tuesday
