News Bomber Thompson Thread - Police investigation - Post wisely.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes - he was on Big Footy for a few years without telling me about it.

Then lets me know about it after we won '07, so that forever on the Bay I am a bandwaggoner. Set me up beautifully ....

But hardly the first display of his evil behaviour ......
That's why it pays to join after a non-flag year ;)
 
actually, thats not quite right... due to the amounts involved, if it goes to trial on the charges as they are, the court will presume he was either selling or intending/preparing to sell. the onus will be on the defence to rebut this presumption, on the lower threshold of balance of probabilities.
Fair enough. So he gets the same charge for having a lot of drugs at his house as if he was caught in a sting distributing?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Fair enough. So he gets the same charge for having a lot of drugs at his house as if he was caught in a sting distributing?

with the proviso that im not even sure what the precise charges are, and under which act (i assume victorian drugs legislation)...

what offence a defendant is ultimately charged with depends on what offences are revealed by the evidence.

as it stands, and from the small amount of news articles ive read, it appears that the charges are with police as a police prosecutor appeared at the bail hearing. the charges will then be referred to the victorian DPP for prosecution. they will review the evidence, and possibly amend or drop the charges.

but yes - if you are caught with a 'trafficable quantity' of drugs in your house, the legal presumption is you were intending to sell them. 'trafficable quantity' means just that: a quantity deemed to be an amount to 'traffic'. so a person arrested at home with 5 grams of heroin could end up with the same charge as a person 'stung' actually trying to sell 5 grams of heroin. and the circumstances of the 'drugs at home' would be taken into consideration - bagged up for sale, scales covered in the same drugs, notebooks detailing sales, planned sales, previous sales, etc.

that legal presumption could be rebutted: medical records showing a sustained history of use of that particular drug in large amounts, utensils for using only at home and no 'selling equipment', no large cash amounts found in the house. but that is all on the defence to adduce once the amount of the particular drug is over the threshold.

how a person arrives before the court on charges does not matter. that would play out in sentencing if convicted, though - i.e. the person actively 'stung' selling would possibly receive a harsher penalty than the person who just had it at home. and of course, prior history, personal circumstances, remorse, rehabilitative efforts made, etc.
 
I mean, if you're a drug user with a lot of money, it's just smart business buying in bulk when prices are low ;)
 
I mean, if you're a drug user with a lot of money, it's just smart business buying in bulk when prices are low ;)

could argue that, yep... i have 42.5 litres of mineral water in my cupboard right now - far more than is necessary for even a fortnights 'personal use'.

of course, heavy drug users are also generally heavily addicted, and tend to use what they have rather than what they need, so your above mightnt be too clever without incredible will-power; not being a quality addicts are generally associated with.
 
could argue that, yep... i have 42.5 litres of mineral water in my cupboard right now - far more than is necessary for even a fortnights 'personal use'.

of course, heavy drug users are also generally heavily addicted, and tend to use what they have rather than what they need, so your above mightnt be too clever without incredible will-power; not being a quality addicts are generally associated with.
I think you have a problem. Mineral Water is a gateway beverage.
 
One is English, one is American
One is British, one is American (sort of).

However, language use and preference evolves.

'Jail' has been in use in Britain since the early 19th century. 'Gaol' was more popular until the mid-to-late 20th century, but is now firmly beaten by the use of 'jail'.

For example, English newspapers use the word 'jail' and have done for quite some time. The ABC style guide here uses jail. The BBC uses jail, too.

Gaol is a relic consigned, as it should be, to the bin - just as the alternative spellings gial, gayhol and iaiole were.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This should not even be a discussion thread on here.
I'm surprised it is allowed
The man deserves his presumption of innocence until otherwise proved
Give it a spell please!!
The most successful coach in Geelong history is charged with trafficking drugs and it's not in the public interest? Oh come ON.

Besides, there is hardly any hearsay going on in this thread beyond what's already reported by journos in national papers.
 
The most successful coach in Geelong history is charged with trafficking drugs and it's not in the public interest? Oh come ON.

Besides, there is hardly any hearsay going on in this thread beyond what's already reported by journos in national papers.
Not suggesting that it isn't in the public interest. Putting words in my mouth there. No, journos do crucify people quite often and write utterly inaccurate accounts of facts. I'm just saying that until we know what he is guilty of, let's not presume anything. He deserves that from this mob at least. We got a fair bit from him, let us just offer him the courtesy of waiting to see the outcome before shreds are ripped. Either way, hard road ahead for the Bomb.
 
Grant Thomas has shamed Geelong about knowing about his habit and doing nothing. Are there rules that coaches agree to about illicit drugs? Pretty bad either way. A sad time for our club. They should have helped him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top