Ceebee
Norm Smith Medallist
Really do not know how Hird sleeps at night .
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.
Really do not know how Hird sleeps at night .
Really do not know how Hird sleeps at night .
Really feels like Essendon's legal team are milking Paul Little's well established penchant for litigation.
If I was Little I would be getting 2nd and 3rd legal opinions on their case that was presented. To get burnt on the decision the way they did, either he was ignorant to the legal advice given or the advice given was pretty poor.
Ease up on the condescending tone... not sure what I said wrong?Is anyone taking notes?
Ease up on the condescending tone... not sure what I said wrong?
Or they are all living in a dream world where if you truly, truly believe wonderful things can happen? They are delusionary... the sooner this whole case receives its lethal injection, the better.If I was Little I would be getting 2nd and 3rd legal opinions on their case that was presented. To get burnt on the decision the way they did, either he was ignorant to the legal advice given or the advice given was pretty poor.
Ease up on the condescending tone... not sure what I said wrong?
Ms Hird, who describes herself as an assiduous record-keeper, witnessed the events that followed.
"Certainly I heard David Evans say to James on speakerphone - I was taking notes, I take a lot of notes - on July 25, David admitted that he said to James, 'Can you go into ASADA and tell the whole truth, but don't say what Andrew Demetriou told us'," she said.
It was a Tania Hird joke. He wasn't taking a shot at you.
Yea sorry, I totally misinterpreted your post.You & I have said nothing wrong.......
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-20/james-hirds-wife-reveals-details-of-tip-off-phone-call/5335200
Yea sorry, I totally misinterpreted your post.
I chanell nost of my hate towards Hirds stupid face.
Oh my lordy,now they are using Churchill quotes on the Essendon ASADA thread
No biggie. ..I have no probs with folk calling a a ....On the other side of that ..It's very rare on this board, we pot a fellow poster...
That's the real concern for them. My understanding is that this was only ever a shy at the stumps in the hope that it might have knocked some of the wind out of the sails of ASADA - that didn't happen and so now it is a test of resolve, support and $$$ as to whether they go on. No point in appealing this decision but to see it through now might cost them as much as it would to walk away now.I think the groundswell of support from members and fans is starting to drop away too.
It seems to me that many fans justified the Federal Court action as a fact finding mission. An appeal serves no purpose in that regard.
That's the real concern for them. My understanding is that this was only ever a shy at the stumps in the hope that it might have knocked some of the wind out of the sails of ASADA - that didn't happen and so now it is a test of resolve, support and $$$ as to whether they go on. No point in appealing this decision but to see it through now might cost them as much as it would to walk away now.
AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick averted a potentially bitter confrontation between Essendon chairman Paul Little and the other club chiefs when he agreed instead to communicate the clubs' anger with Essendon to Little privately after the meeting of all clubs at Crown ahead of the Brownlow.
Or John Middleton just saw it differently.If I was Little I would be getting 2nd and 3rd legal opinions on their case that was presented. To get burnt on the decision the way they did, either he was ignorant to the legal advice given or the advice given was pretty poor.
For an appeal to succeed a party must convince the Court that the Judge that heard the original case made an error of law and that the error was of such significance that the decision should be overturned. Some examples of significant errors of law are that the Judge that heard the original case:
The Court hearing the appeal:
- applied an incorrect principle of law; or
- made a finding of fact or facts on an important issue which could not be supported by the evidence.
- does not consider any new evidence or information that was not presented in the original case (except in special circumstances);
- does not call witnesses to give evidence;
- does read all the relevant documents filed by the parties for the original case;
- does read the relevant parts of the transcript of the original case, if available;
- does listen to legal argument from both parties to the appeal.
I am no fancy big city lawyer but I've skimmed the judgement and I reckon Essendon will have a hard time successfully making a case within this appeals framework.
To be fair, I think what has been alleged to have been taken has been shown to be ineffective. Punish for the illegal activity, but hard to prove it affected any outcomes. I don't think there was any performance enhancing going on.