No Opposition Supporters CAS hands down guilty verdict - Players appealing - Dank shot - no opposition - (cont in pt.2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Posts
59,847
Likes
61,045
Location
Down the rabbit hole
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fatebringer
What is the official standard of proof required for entry onto the Register of Findings ?

I've seen it described as just that a possible doping violation may have occurred, but I haven't been able to find anything solid that confirms this or says otherwise.
that's correct
 

cymarak

Go Gators !
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Posts
2,977
Likes
4,007
Location
Over it. All of it.
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
49ers, Gators
So, if I understand correctly:
  • standard of proof for issuing SCN = doping violation may have occurred
  • standard of proof for entry onto RoF = doping violation may have occurred
  • standard of proof for guilty verdict at AFL tribunal = doping violation did occur, to the 'comfortable satisfaction' of tribunal
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Posts
2,918
Likes
636
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Man Utd, LA Lakers
So, if I understand correctly:
  • standard of proof for issuing SCN = doping violation may have occurred
  • standard of proof for entry onto RoF = doping violation may have occurred
  • standard of proof for guilty verdict at AFL tribunal = doping violation did occur, to the 'comfortable satisfaction' of tribunal
i think the last part is 'beyond reasonable doubt', rather than 'comfortable satisfaction', but not 100% sure.
 

cymarak

Go Gators !
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Posts
2,977
Likes
4,007
Location
Over it. All of it.
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
49ers, Gators
i think the last part is 'beyond reasonable doubt', rather than 'comfortable satisfaction', but not 100% sure.
It's definitely 'comfortable satisfaction'.

15.1 Burden and Standard of Proof
AFL shall have the burden of establishing that an Anti Doping Rule Violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether AFL has established an Anti Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of CAS or the Tribunal bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability, but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where this Code places the burden of proof upon the Player or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti Doping Rule Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability, except as provided in Clauses 14.3 and 14.5 where the Player must satisfy a higher burden of proof.
http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule 6 - National Anti-Doping Code.pdf
 

scottmclaren

All Australian
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Posts
650
Likes
750
AFL Club
Essendon
If SC is issued, is their is time limit that a RoF entry must be made in?

I want to see if McDonut has brass balls like J Hird and pushes for RoF entry before federal court appeal. He may end up with 34 athletes suing for RoF entry made from an unlawful investigation.
 
Last edited:

Pweter

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
12,678
Likes
15,681
Location
Right here, right now
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Central Districts, Detroit Pistons
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...shanghai-factory/story-fnia3gpe-1227088199608

If this has a semblance of truth, the focus is likely going to be on the supply chain from Charters' China procurements through Alavi and on to Dank. Nothing really new there, is there?

Also how does such confidential information repeatedly find it's way into the public sphere? Unless journos are throwing darts and reporting it as quasi-fact I'm sick of it. Let it happen then report the real facts please (yes I know, that ship sailed years ago, and i nthe case of this saga on about Feb 5 2013).
 

cymarak

Go Gators !
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Posts
2,977
Likes
4,007
Location
Over it. All of it.
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
49ers, Gators
Don't Asada have to prove that TB4 was in the needle not go "We think you used TB4"
What ASADA thinks is only relevant when it comes to the decision to issue SCNs - when it comes to the tribunal, they have to convince the tribunal to the 'comfortable satisfaction' level that a player used TB4.

Given there are no positive drug tests, I don't think there is a lot of precedent for how much 'proof' is enough to be found guilty, and the 'comfortable satisfaction' test is vague at best.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
What ASADA thinks is only relevant when it comes to the decision to issue SCNs - when it comes to the tribunal, they have to convince the tribunal to the 'comfortable satisfaction' level that a player used TB4.

Given there are no positive drug tests, I don't think there is a lot of precedent for how much 'proof' is enough to be found guilty, and the 'comfortable satisfaction' test is vague at best.
Talking hypothetical but what happens in the circumstance that there's only 25 vials purchased and accusations against 34 players. No one can no for sure what players received if their main evidence are invoices and supply chain documents so are they going to perform a raffle to decide which players received it? So hypothetically they may potentially have circumstantial evidence that TB4 may have been at EFC (and should be Melbourne as well given their thymomodulin program) but how do they prove with comfortable satisfaction which players received it? This is where they are fishing for admissions/deals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,717
Likes
16,340
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
Talking hypothetical but what happens in the circumstance that there's only 25 vials purchased and accusations against 34 players. No one can no for sure what players received if their main evidence are invoices and supply chain documents so are they going to perform a raffle to decide which players received it? So hypothetically they may potentially have circumstantial evidence that TB4 may have been at EFC (and should be Melbourne as well given their thymomodulin program) but how do they prove with comfortable satisfaction which players received it? This is where they are fishing for admissions/deals.

Still haven't heard an explanation of how the TB4 was paid for seeing as the chemist cancelled the invoice he issued to the club. ASADA assuming it was a cash deal?...
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,717
Likes
16,340
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers

60sbomber

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Posts
1,732
Likes
1,868
Location
Frankston
AFL Club
Essendon
From everything known to date, the theory that we used TB4 has lots of holes in it AND the theory that we used Thymomodulin instead has lots of holes in it as well.
Correct.
Until or unless someone can produce a plausible, verifiable version of what happened, neither theory can be believed with "comfortable satisfaction".
And we don't have to prove the thymomodulin theory to anyone's comfortable satisfaction, but ASADA do have to prove their TB4 theory to a tribunals comfortable satisfaction.
The correct outcome would be for the tribunal to say "We can't ascertain WTF happened with comfortable satisfaction."
No invoices, no supply documentation for anything like the quantity required. Just a bit of a guess from ASADA based on what they want to believe.
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
So ASADA 'won't be rushed'... good.. cause they have only had 18 months to get their shit together.. would hate for them to feel pressured.

Finding it very hard to believe that the 'new' SCN's aren't ready to go.. considering they have had 6 months to prepared them...!

More stalling and delays.. basically ASADA making sure that any suspensions would be served during a season.. so I'm guessing the will call an ADRVP on March 30 and not a day before...!!

Dank is still waiting for his ADRVP and his SCN was issued in May iirc!

The whole thing is a sick, twisted joke.

I can't believe that we are wasting millions of tax payers dollars to have a near two year investigation into whether 34 AFL players were duped into inadvertently taking one dose of TB4 to play in a private sporting competition in 2012...

Glad we kick all those disabled people off welfare though.. tough times and all...
 

Duckworth

Peptide Awareness
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Posts
6,823
Likes
5,114
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
So ASADA 'won't be rushed'... good.. cause they have only had 18 months to get their shit together.. would hate for them to feel pressured.

Finding it very hard to believe that the 'new' SCN's aren't ready to go.. considering they have had 6 months to prepared them...!

More stalling and delays.. basically ASADA making sure that any suspensions would be served during a season.. so I'm guessing the will call an ADRVP on March 30 and not a day before...!!

Dank is still waiting for his ADRVP and his SCN was issued in May iirc!

The whole thing is a sick, twisted joke.

I can't believe that we are wasting millions of tax payers dollars to have a near two year investigation into whether 34 AFL players were duped into inadvertently taking one dose of TB4 to play in a private sporting competition in 2012...

Glad we kick all those disabled people off welfare though.. tough times and all...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom