Scape Goat Alleged SPP incident/broken curfew + malicious and exploitative reporting by Channel 7 news

[PowerBaz]

So when is this resolved, seems the AFL are going out of their way to drag this one on.

Just name him for the game against the kangas and cop whatever is coming.

 

[finbarr]

Geez...

 

[raman]

 

[Portology]

No, code for we should have suspended Sam for the behaviour, not for the fact that he was drunk/broke team rules.

That’s why we want the sexual misconduct part removed - so we can say that he has already served two of the three weeks for breaking the respect and responsibility policy in a generic sense.

'alleged' behaviour

No mate. No sweeping things under the Doormat here, not in any sense.

Janus, if I read his current face correctly, is 100% right to subtly allude to the way the AFL tried to manipulate Essendon situation down a certain path.

Finding some entity guilty of a "general" offence in order to try to move on quickly and minimize the attention to the detailed issues only works for the lawyers and enforcers in this day and age, not for the victims. And for the "guilty" the stain of all possible allegations under the massively overloaded word "guilty" remains.

 

[MrMeaner]

The reason there is a negotiation is the same as the reason the club suspended Sam for breaking team rules, not for the alleged incident: to come out and say that Sam did this, without conclusive evidence or Sam's admission, leaves the AFL, in the first instance, and the club in the second, open to defamation. Neither are a court, their findings are not privileged. If I were advising Sam on this (and I am clearly not as I am typing this out here instead), i would tell Sam that he has the upper hand in this negotiation.

As an aside, I would put money on one of the QC's opinions to the club being on this point (most likely in framing the initial suspension).

 

[Portology]

The reason there is a negotiation is the same as the reason the club suspended Sam for breaking team rules, not for the alleged incident: to come out and say that Sam did this, without conclusive evidence or Sam's admission, leaves the AFL, in the first instance, and the club in the second, open to defamation. Neither are a court, their findings are not privileged. If I were advising Sam on this (and I am clearly not as I am typing this out here instead), i would tell Sam that he has the upper hand in this negotiation.

As an aside, I would put money on one of the QC's opinions to the club being on this point (most likely in framing the initial suspension).

Heh. So we can't see the AFL's Disintegrity Commission report unless we're appointed Sam's representation, or we sue them?

 

[VineValerian]

Assuming spp does remember all of his behaviour that night and he is innocent of the allegations, and the club's investigation is thorough etc ... then why are some people here expressing concern for the welfare of the young lady? You would've thought it brings her motives into question. She made allegations in a news interview.

So that Sam is viewed as a compassionate, respectful person. Which, as he refutes any sexual misconduct, appears to be the case, so just re-stating the obvious.

 

[MrMeaner]

Heh. So we can't see the AFL's Disintegrity Commission report unless we're appointed Sam's representation, or we sue them?

That's a different issue. It is a more complex one, involving the AFL's privacy obligations and, possibly, legal professional privilege.

The privilege I was talking about in relation to the penalty was a privilege against suit. Basically, you cannot sue a witness, an advocate or a judge for what they say in court or, in the judge's case, what he or she writes in a judgment. The club and the AFL do not enjoy that kind of privilege (nor does any employer). There may be more limited forms of privilege or other defences they may be able to rely upon if Sam did decide to sue after release of the report. It is safer to get his consent beforehand and close off that option though. That gives Sam some negotiating power (assuming he thinks he is in the right).

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I wonder if the club or Sam have a strong enough case to take this the international Court of Arbitration for Sport?

cart before the horse here. There is a grievance tribunal you go to first.

 

[PowerBaz]

I think the AFL have a more important VFL game on tomoz to worry about clearing this up in a hurry.

 

[DaTBird187]

I think the AFL have a more important VFL game on tomoz to worry about clearing this up in a hurry.

Yep. Gil has to make sure he's got tickets for his mum and dad to the big game.

 

[Janus]

cart before the horse here. There is a grievance tribunal you go to first.

Not if you have a case against a third party you don’t. You can go straight to court.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Not if you have a case against a third party you don’t. You can go straight to court.

I assumed he was talking about a sporting penalty.

 

[Killer Power]

Re the girl in the video outside the club, I was also of the understanding that she is the gf of his friend. Now I think of it though, this does not mean she isn’t the one making the complaint.

Its an absolute disgrace that C7 have been able to effectively double down in showing this new footage without providing any context whatsoever when they well know that the girl shown is not involved in the complaint. By not providing that context they are inferring that this footage and girl are somehow connected. And it is this hot take that the general public are left with. It really is reprehensible behaviour towards a potentially vulnerable young man.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

nice summary SgtSchulz

 

[PAFC66]

Its an absolute disgrace that C7 have been able to effectively double down in showing this new footage without providing any context whatsoever when they well know that the girl shown is not involved in the complaint. By not providing that context they are inferring that this footage and girl are somehow connected. And it is this hot take that the general public are left with. It really is reprehensible behaviour towards a potentially vulnerable young man.

And all that is great ammunition for a defamation case.

 

[mic59]

As things stand at the moment I'm finding it difficult to even reconcile myself to Sam playing till after the Showdown. With the holiday and the AFL dragging their feet the Roos on 28/4 is pretty much out of the question. Even the Eagles on 5/5 is looking more distant than expected. And with no football for more than a month then even when he is available I would expect Sam to come back through the SANFL. De-railing seasons seems to be something the AFL does well, Sam was not playing well so the loss of him as a player wouldn't have done all that much but there's no doubt the whole saga has preyed on at least some players' minds.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I'd love Koch to go and meet with Stuart Littlemore QC - one of the country's best defamation QC's and a legitimate pompous prick at the bar - and come out and say we are investigating the possibility of taking 7 News Adelaide and Elspeth Hussey to court for defamation. Get Littlemore involved and it gets national exposure, Stokes probably gets involved wondering WTF is one of my main stars suing one of my divisions and all hell breaks lose and Elspeth shits herself and goes and wastes a shit load of time and money talking to an expensive QC. Put some heat back on her.

 

[MrMeaner]

I'd love Koch to go and meet with Stuart Littlemore QC - one of the country's best defamation QC's and a legitimate pompous prick at the bar - and come out and say we are investigating the possibility of taking 7 News Adelaide and Elspeth Hussey to court for defamation. Get Littlemore involved and it gets national exposure, Stokes probably gets involved wondering WTF is one of my main stars suing one of my divisions and all hell breaks lose and Elspeth shits herself and goes and wastes a shit load of time and money talking to an expensive QC. Put some heat back on her.

The reporter would not have separate representation.

 

[ploppy]

Start playing the race card. Call out afl for picking on indigenous players and giving them harsher penalties and watch them back off at a million miles an hour.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The reporter would not have separate representation.

Would probably still and go and seek her own advise and that is time and money wasted.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Start playing the race card. Call out afl for picking on indigenous players and giving them harsher penalties and watch them back off at a million miles an hour.

Can definitely play it for 7 news reporting, and who know even the accuser could have that in her subconscious..

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Start playing the race card. Call out afl for picking on indigenous players and giving them harsher penalties and watch them back off at a million miles an hour.

Haha black bloke on white women fear - Kill a Mockingbird all over.

 

[MrMeaner]

Would probably still and go and seek her own advise and that is time and money wasted.

I could almost guarantee she wouldn't. As an employee, she would be indemnified by Ch7.

The only way she would be getting independent advice would be if Ch7 decided to discipline her. That's not going to happen as they had the editorial control.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I could almost guarantee she wouldn't. As an employee, she would be indemnified by Ch7.

The only way she would be getting independent advice would be if Ch7 decided to discipline her. That's not going to happen as they had the editorial control.

She would go and talk to a legal expert. She isn't going to say I will leave it all in 7's hands and have no worries at all about it. If Stokes' people say we lose this and you can look for a job elsewhere she is going to go and seek out some advise. Its all speculation, but the bottom line is it would put the wind up her.