Club condemns Adelaide Crows player for allegedly sharing an image of a woman without permission

[Toucan Ocean]

I think maybe you do.
View attachment 2328126

Where to begin?

Feel free to go look up section 26C of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) and see what it says. I'll wait.*

(* Don't worry, I'll save you the trouble: it doesn't exist.)

Dig further, however, and you might find section 26C of the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA). It was quoted earlier in this thread but here it is again:

SUMMARY OFFENCES ACT 1953 - SECT 26C

www5.austlii.edu.au

This provides that a person who distributes an 'invasive image' of another person without that person's consent is guilty of an offence potentially punishable by imprisonment.

The Act defines an 'invasive image' as one that 'depicts the person in a place other than a public place ... engaged in a private act ... or in a state of undress such that - in the case of a female - the bare breasts are visible; or in any case - the bare genital or anal region is visible.'

For completeness, a 'private act' is defined as meaning a 'sexual act of a kind not ordinarily done in public'; or an 'act carried out in a sexual manner or context'; or 'using a toilet'.

I'd recommend against relying on AI summaries of laws.

 

[1990crow]

Must admit I'm kind of interested who leaked photo incident to the media 4-5 months after the fact, and their motivation?

AFL. Punishment for Ricciutos outburst on Pannell corruption.

 

[Cleric]

Where to begin?

Feel free to go look up section 26C of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) and see what it says. I'll wait.*

(* Don't worry, I'll save you the trouble: it doesn't exist.)

Dig further, however, and you might find section 26C of the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA). It was quoted earlier in this thread but here it is again:

SUMMARY OFFENCES ACT 1953 - SECT 26C

www5.austlii.edu.au

This provides that a person who distributes an 'invasive image' of another person without that person's consent is guilty of an offence potentially punishable by imprisonment.

The Act defines an 'invasive image' as one that 'depicts the person in a place other than a public place ... engaged in a private act ... or in a state of undress such that - in the case of a female - the bare breasts are visible; or in any case - the bare genital or anal region is visible.'

For completeness, a 'private act' is defined as meaning a 'sexual act of a kind not ordinarily done in public'; or an 'act carried out in a sexual manner or context'; or 'using a toilet'.

I'd recommend against relying on AI summaries of laws.

And non of that has been shown to have taken place.
There's no evidence that she was in anyway nude in the photos. It's not up to me to prove a negative, it's up to those who claim it is something more than what has been revealed.

 

[Cleric]

A - It would be extremely inappropriate for any organisation to ignore the wishes of a victim in such circumstances.

B - The AFL has shown time and again they are more than happy to sweep anything under the carpet if they think they can get away with it.

They just suspended a player for making "inappropriate comments", but you don't think a player sending nude photos, which is an offensive, wouldn't have been?

 

[Cleric]

No, you’re making the mistake of ignoring that it was at the request of the victim that this was not pursued further.

Meaning that you can’t read anything in to what the police did or did not do.

What you can read in to is the fact that the club felt the need to put out a public statement condemning what happened. Why would they do that for a player sending a clothed and non sexual image?

Again, it's not up to me to prove a negative, as you can't do that. If you claim it was a nude photo, then you have to be the one to prove it, and as it stands, there has been no evidence or accusations that that was the case.
If the club or a well respected media person comes out and says it was then I will readdress my thoughts.

 

[jimvic]

They just suspended a player for making "inappropriate comments", but you don't think a player sending nude photos, which is an offensive, wouldn't have been?

Surely Caro is all over this

 

[Coopers]

I'd also tend to suspect that incidence of this behaviour is far less in the AFL than in the general community of males aged 18-25.

It is getting through, it's just never going to have a 100% strike rate

You reckon it's less? I don't see evidence for it being worse than everyone else, but I doubt it's less.
Like, I'd just assume it's at the same rate.

 

[Truck25]

Must admit I'm kind of interested who leaked photo incident to the media 4-5 months after the fact, and their motivation?

Because Powa are crap and the media need to move the focus

 

[jo172]

You reckon it's less? I don't see evidence for it being worse than everyone else, but I doubt it's less.
Like, I'd just assume it's at the same rate.

All speculation, but I tend to think that the better education/increased consequences arising out of being in the public eye would reduce it amongst AFL players as against the general population

 

[feenix67]

All speculation, but I tend to think that the better education/increased consequences arising out of being in the public eye would reduce it amongst AFL players as against the general population

Hasn't worked for recreational drug use. Most assessments pitch it as equivalent or slightly higher than the general population.

 

[Trigger13]

Given the player in question hasn’t set the world on fire on-field, I hope this puts a rocket up him to pull his finger out and stop being a flog.

 

[Cromulant]

Given the player in question hasn’t set the world on fire on-field, I hope this puts a rocket up him to pull his finger out and stop being a flog.

Drury ??

He's been real good in the SANFL.

 

[Pugsley]

Again, I'm glad that we're at a stage where we're condemning this kind of thing and managing the fall out in house and not being dragged into a running commentary/soap opera on it.

This is all Neil Craig and that DVD's fault.

Richard Tambling likes this.

 

[Trigger13]

Drury ??

He's been real good in the SANFL.

I’m confused. Drury didn’t share the explicit/revenge pr0n material. That was a different player. Who is on the list.

 

[Cromulant]

I’m confused. Drury didn’t share the explicit/revenge pr0n material. That was a different player. Who is on the list.

My bad, I thought we were talking about the hot mic thing.

 

[cmndstab]

Seems like the hot mic incident has been appropriately handled.

Is it a massive issue? Not really. Is it inappropriate? Yes. Is it ****ing stupid to say shit like that when you are wearing a microphone? Absolutely. If you have a microphone on you, you should assume you are being recorded from the moment you put it on until the moment you take it off.

One match SANFL ban and a public denouncement seems to be the appropriate punishment from the club to me. It's more of a "don't ever put us in this situation again, you idiot" type of punishment.

 

[Cromulant]

Seems like the hot mic incident has been appropriately handled.

Is it a massive issue? Not really. Is it inappropriate? Yes. Is it ****ing stupid to say shit like that when you are wearing a microphone? Absolutely. If you have a microphone on you, you should assume you are being recorded from the moment you put it on until the moment you take it off.

One match SANFL ban and a public denouncement seems to be the appropriate punishment from the club to me. It's more of a "don't ever put us in this situation again, you idiot" type of punishment.

I dont think the club suspended him, the SANFL did.

 

[BRL121]

Given the player in question hasn’t set the world on fire on-field, I hope this puts a rocket up him to pull his finger out and stop being a flog.

So, you know who it is?

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Hasn't worked for recreational drug use. Most assessments pitch it as equivalent or slightly higher than the general population.

Young dudes with money. Who would have thought?

 

[FR0GGY]

Is there any precedent in the afl?

 

[FR0GGY]

Who is the player Trigger13

 

[Soggy2112]

Again, it's not up to me to prove a negative, as you can't do that. If you claim it was a nude photo, then you have to be the one to prove it, and as it stands, there has been no evidence or accusations that that was the case.
If the club or a well respected media person comes out and says it was then I will readdress my thoughts.

You were the one saying that “there is no way it was a nude photo”.

I never said it was a nude photo, but from everything we know I think it’s a fairly safe bet it was a naked/sexual image.

They just suspended a player for making "inappropriate comments", but you don't think a player sending nude photos, which is an offensive, wouldn't have been?

To what I said, which you seem to be ignoring:

If a victim in a circumstance such as this decides that they would not like the matter pursued further, it would be inappropriate for any organisation to ignore that wish and take further action against the perpetrator. Suspending a player would bring further attention to the issue, and risk exposing the identity of the victim, which presumably she did not want.

Unfortunately, in sexual harassment/assault cases the investigation process can be gruelling and in some cases traumatic for victims. As a result, many choose for their own welfare not to take matters further. If the police or any other organisation ignore that request it would be extremely inappropriate.

Also, the AFL has a history of taking action only after incidents are made public, and will generally try to cover up where possible. The recent suspension was enacted by the SANFL, and was also recorded, so doesn’t really disprove my original claim, that the AFL absolutely will cover something up/ignore it if they think they can get away with it. The most recent examples being the Rioli and Balta situations.

 

[Cromulant]

Josh Money practically rubbing himself while reporting on a "Culture problem" at the footy club

 

[Crow54]

Josh Money practically rubbing himself while reporting on a "Culture problem" at the footy club

7 seems to have a vendetta against the Crows at the moment.

 

[Crow till I die]

7 seems to have a vendetta against the Crows at the moment.

Poor bastards at C7. They have taken an absolute battering previously from josh making stuff up and most people have tuned out to them. So its like the guy who cried wolf, people stop listening to them. They are irrelevant.