Certified Legendary Thread 34 Essendon* Players suspended for doping violations - No opposition fans. Check OP for thread rules

If Essendon* gets slapped on the wrist with a wet lettuce leaf, I will .......


  • Total voters
    250
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dramoth

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Posts
25,618
Likes
13,072
Location
Bunbury, WA
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
I have been on the HTB trying to explain to a few of the loser Essendon* muppets why they are going to get torn a new one.

They seem to think that this is a criminal process and that due process and presumption of innocence stands instead of it being an investigation into a systematic doping regime that has no due process in a criminal court and that the burden of innocence is not applicable.

The evidence points at Essendon purchasing a load of banned substances.

ASADA couldnt find said banned substances when they started their investigation and having all the coaches and staff come out saying that they were the ones getting injected with TB4 to try and distract ASADA from actually finding out where the stuff went.

The burden of proof is on the players to prove that they were not given TB4... and thanks to Mark Evans and the rest of the Essendon* idiots shredding the evidence that could potentially prove the players innocence, the players need to try and prove that they werent given the stuff.

At the end of the day... the players are screwed and they know it... Essendon knows it... but no one over there wants to admit it. So they are trying barratry to try and harrass ASADA into not pursuing the matter via threats of lawsuits and other legal actions.
 

Thrawn

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 21, 2001
Posts
31,870
Likes
22,723
Location
Melbourne, Australia.
AFL Club
Carlton
Sure, they'll take it to the Federal court. Then it'll be thrown out because it's not their jurisdiction, they'll tell them to bugger off to the AAT and/or the CAS. Considering an ex-federal court judge and former head of the AAT has given all this the green light (and has been 'complimentary' of their investigative processes), then this is a whole load of fluff. But if they want to waste millions of more dollars to drag it out for half a year more, by all means. The players will still have to serve their suspensions in the meantime.

But just you watch, at the last minute they will roll over and plea for mercy, like they did when the other 17 clubs met.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dramoth

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Posts
25,618
Likes
13,072
Location
Bunbury, WA
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
Sure, they'll take it to the Federal court. Then it'll be thrown out because it's not their jurisdiction, they'll tell them to bugger off to the AAT and/or the CAS. Considering an ex-federal court judge and former head of the AAT has given all this the green light (and has been 'complimentary' of their investigative processes), then this is a whole load of fluff. But if they want to waste millions of more dollars to drag it out for half a year more, by all means. The players will still have to serve their suspensions in the meantime.

But just you watch, at the last minute they will roll over and plea for mercy, like they did when the other 17 clubs met.
it's called barratry... trying to get their way via the use of threats of legal action.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,311
Likes
27,196
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #6,391
They seem to think that this is a criminal process and that due process and presumption of innocence stands instead of it being an investigation into a systematic doping regime that has no due process in a criminal court and that the burden of innocence is not applicable.
More to it than this mate. Clearly the Essendon players dont have a defence against the charges (they admit they have no records and no idea of what was actually injected).

Where they DO have a leg to stand on is to challenge that the process/ investigation was flawed. And I think they have an arguable case on this point.

They will seek an injunction from the Federal Court tomorrow stopping the matter going to the ADRVP and arguing that the whole investigation was fatally flawed by virtue of denying the players natural justice via improper collection of evidence, the (alleged) illegality of the joing investigation under the ASADA act, leaks by ASADA, the illegaility of releasing the interrum report and a few other points.

If they win on the injunction it buys them time before the matter is heard. If (when its finally heard) they win the case (and the investigation is flawed) then they'll get away with it.

For the record, in my legal opinion I dont think EFC will be succesful (caveat being that Im obviously not privy to the precise legal arguments, authorities and evidence in the case). Australia doesnt have anywhere near rhe same strength of 'improper evidence' laws that countries like the USA have. And thats in criminal matters, not administrative law matters. The breach of nondisclosure by ASADA (if proven) would unlikely wipe the whole case out, unless it could be found that the breach led to a denial of natural justice by the Crown. I assume that there is no issue of ASADA acting ultra vires (outside its jurisdiction) here either.

Im no administrative law guru mind you.

In a nutshell, its my best legal guess that the EFC players have an arguable case. I stand by what I said earlier though; they will most likely seek to tie the matter up in the courts as long as possible, while keeping as tight lipped as possible (ostensibly so as not to 'prejudice the case' but in reality just to keep it and their tactics off the front page). It will most likely get thrown out when it finally gets set down for a hearing.

It's an expensive tactic. Then again, from this point on and regardless of what happens, the EFC are going to be bleeding money like a faucet. Its going to cost them millions (legal fees, sponsorship, membership) even if they win. Its going to cost them tens of millions if they lose.

The only way they'll survive this is with the direct help of the AFL (and likely the other clubs). Money, and special rules to let them actually participate.
 

FlowersByIrene

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Posts
16,610
Likes
17,619
Location
Perth via Carlton Land
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Knicks, Giants, Man U
I have been on the HTB trying to explain to a few of the loser Essendon* muppets why they are going to get torn a new one.

They seem to think that this is a criminal process and that due process and presumption of innocence stands instead of it being an investigation into a systematic doping regime that has no due process in a criminal court and that the burden of innocence is not applicable.

The evidence points at Essendon purchasing a load of banned substances.

ASADA couldnt find said banned substances when they started their investigation and having all the coaches and staff come out saying that they were the ones getting injected with TB4 to try and distract ASADA from actually finding out where the stuff went.

The burden of proof is on the players to prove that they were not given TB4... and thanks to Mark Evans and the rest of the Essendon* idiots shredding the evidence that could potentially prove the players innocence, the players need to try and prove that they werent given the stuff.

At the end of the day... the players are screwed and they know it... Essendon knows it... but no one over there wants to admit it. So they are trying barratry to try and harrass ASADA into not pursuing the matter via threats of lawsuits and other legal actions.
They claim there has to be criminal and evidential rules of law. But this is administration law. (Which i'm studyign this semester, im crap at it, much better at evidence which i aced today, so if it was a criminal case i could school them, but noooo, all i know is there isnt much fairness in Admin law, decisions usually stand, and they dont really have to be based on a lot)
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,311
Likes
27,196
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #6,394
They claim there has to be criminal and evidential rules of law. But this is administration law. (Which i'm studyign this semester, im crap at it, much better at evidence which i aced today, so if it was a criminal case i could school them, but noooo, all i know is there isnt much fairness in Admin law, decisions usually stand, and they dont really have to be based on a lot)
Wait till you get to privitive clauses and perogative writs. Lots of fun.

I think the players look to have an arguable case. That interim report certainly seems to breach the disclosure rules. If ASADA shared any information with the AFL during the joint investigation (which seems almost inevitable really) then they are also in breach of the nondiscosure in the ASADA act.

Whether this can be said to be a denial of natural justice or procedural fairness to the extent that it voids the whole investigation is a different story.

I think I'll side with the Federal Court judge who reviewed these cases before the SC's were issued and gave each one of them (and the investigation) a big Federal Court tick of approval. Admin law re Crown agencies is his speciality.
 

FlowersByIrene

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Posts
16,610
Likes
17,619
Location
Perth via Carlton Land
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Knicks, Giants, Man U
Wait till you get to privitive clauses and perogative writs. Lots of fun.

I think the players look to have an arguable case. That interim report certainly seems to breach the disclosure rules. If ASADA shared any information with the AFL during the joint investigation (which seems almost inevitable really) then they are also in breach of the nondiscosure in the ASADA act.

Whether this can be said to be a denial of natural justice or procedural fairness to the extent that it voids the whole investigation is a different story.

I think I'll side with the Federal Court judge who reviewed these cases before the SC's were issued and gave each one of them (and the investigation) a big Federal Court tick of approval. Admin law re Crown agencies is his speciality.
I'm going to have to make it my specialty by Monday. Maybe I can use the Essendon case to make it more interesting.
 

Just Kreuzing

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Posts
13,477
Likes
11,502
Location
Mamba Style !!
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Lakers
Bugger! Have no plug in power for my lap top!!!
Would love to stay on tonight but my computer is out of JUICE!!!
I'm shocked to be sitting here!!!
I will take notes for you and call the switchboard tomorrow to get your email address to keep you updated BC...
 

Dramoth

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Posts
25,618
Likes
13,072
Location
Bunbury, WA
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
More to it than this mate. Clearly the Essendon players dont have a defence against the charges (they admit they have no records and no idea of what was actually injected).

Where they DO have a leg to stand on is to challenge that the process/ investigation was flawed. And I think they have an arguable case on this point.

They will seek an injunction from the Federal Court tomorrow stopping the matter going to the ADRVP and arguing that the whole investigation was fatally flawed by virtue of denying the players natural justice via improper collection of evidence, the (alleged) illegality of the joing investigation under the ASADA act, leaks by ASADA, the illegaility of releasing the interrum report and a few other points.

If they win on the injunction it buys them time before the matter is heard. If (when its finally heard) they win the case (and the investigation is flawed) then they'll get away with it.

For the record, in my legal opinion I dont think EFC will be succesful (caveat being that Im obviously not privy to the precise legal arguments, authorities and evidence in the case). Australia doesnt have anywhere near rhe same strength of 'improper evidence' laws that countries like the USA have. And thats in criminal matters, not administrative law matters. The breach of nondisclosure by ASADA (if proven) would unlikely wipe the whole case out, unless it could be found that the breach led to a denial of natural justice by the Crown. I assume that there is no issue of ASADA acting ultra vires (outside its jurisdiction) here either.

Im no administrative law guru mind you.

In a nutshell, its my best legal guess that the EFC players have an arguable case. I stand by what I said earlier though; they will most likely seek to tie the matter up in the courts as long as possible, while keeping as tight lipped as possible (ostensibly so as not to 'prejudice the case' but in reality just to keep it and their tactics off the front page). It will most likely get thrown out when it finally gets set down for a hearing.

It's an expensive tactic. Then again, from this point on and regardless of what happens, the EFC are going to be bleeding money like a faucet. Its going to cost them millions (legal fees, sponsorship, membership) even if they win. Its going to cost them tens of millions if they lose.

The only way they'll survive this is with the direct help of the AFL (and likely the other clubs). Money, and special rules to let them actually participate.
The problem that the players and Essendon* will have with their federal court challenge is that they are attacking the process behind the joint AFL/ASADA investigation... which was for the governance issue that they got nailed for last year. If they were going to attack the process, they should have acted immediately last year. They didnt contest it then and therefore, jurisprudence says that they accepted the findings of the joint investigations then and therefore cant contest it now in a completely separate matter.

As it stands, they are going to try and attack the ASADA investigation by trying to link it into the joint investigation last year. Yes, there was a partial connection last year for the initial part of the investigation and up until the point where ASADA handed over their initial interim findings into the doping regime. As far as I remember about the AFL report of findings into the governance issues concerning the doping regime... the ASADA report was an appendix that was used to support the AFL's findings and nothing from the appendix was actually used to form part of the charges against those members of staff, from the Essendon FC, who were charged.

From the day that the AFL charged Hird, Corcoren et al, ASADA has been investigating other avenues and have been consolidating their cases against the individual players and against the staff involved in the establishment of a system doping regime.

It has already been proven that ASADA didnt leak the 12 names earlier on this year and that the leak itself came from Essendon* (they would have 12 names from the list of players that the ASADA/AFL investigation talked to multiple times or it could be from the time when ASADA was winding up it's investigation and called in a number of players to get their affidavits signed off). Essendon would have leaked the names to writers at all the newspapers in Melbourne, possibly hoping that Caro would go off on one and release the names, and when that didnt work, they got their HUN talking head Slobbo to release the names in a sensational expose.

Personally, I dont think that they have an arguable case in that the joint investigation was flawed... and if it was flawed, it was on the part of the AFL and thats a completely separate matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom