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

Status
Not open for further replies.

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
Correct me if I'm wrong - the statements that Alavi / Charters made to ASADA can still be considered as evidence by the tribunal, right ? (the whole 'not bound by the rules of evidence' business that McDevitt spouted earlier in the week).
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

letstayunited

Team Captain
Suspended
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Posts
471
Likes
353
AFL Club
Essendon
Correct me if I'm wrong - the statements that Alavi / Charters made to ASADA can still be considered as evidence by the tribunal, right ? (the whole 'not bound by the rules of evidence' business that McDevitt spouted earlier in the week).
correct but very little weight given to the evidence.
 

letstayunited

Team Captain
Suspended
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Posts
471
Likes
353
AFL Club
Essendon
The fact we cant cross examine them is annoying because no doubt ASADA will use their previous testimonies to argue their case.

Im keen to compare the media coverage/reaction of this loss for ASADA and what will happen when Hird loses his appeal bid.
The players association were opposed to Charter and Alavi giving evidence so I think it has to be seen as a win, surely?
 

Rebellya

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Posts
1,356
Likes
3,336
AFL Club
Essendon
correct but very little weight given to the evidence.
Plus we can introduce charter's assertions that his evidence was manipulated, that he brought in thymodulin and that there was a third party involved. He mentioned these in the radio interview that mcdevitt described as 'gold'.

Will have a similar evidentiary weight I guess.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Smokin

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 9, 2001
Posts
5,081
Likes
1,186
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
fret guys - the foamers reckon this is a win for them as the evidence will go through unchallenged. This was a loss for the players!

according to them asada has them on top knowing they gave us bad drugs - forget that both have stated they have NFI what Dank received, let alone have a clue about the players.

This is bad for us!!!
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Posts
42,561
Likes
63,168
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Devon Shields **** Yes
Moderator #41,288
Excellent, ducks lined up.. Should be an Arsada press conf this arvo.

"Look, we cant proceed now because of this decision. They have got us on a technicality, otherwise we would have stuffed Essendon over soooo bad."
That might have flown if it wasn't for McDevitt saying they weren't required for their slam dunk, air tight, ex-Federal court judge approved case.
 

Smokin

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 9, 2001
Posts
5,081
Likes
1,186
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Plus we can introduce charter's assertions that his evidence was manipulated, that he brought in thymodulin and that there was a third party involved. He mentioned these in the radio interview that mcdevitt described as 'gold'.

Will have a similar evidentiary weight I guess.
exactly, plus Alavi has said he has no idea what it was.

Their whole testimonies arent worth the paper they are written on - seems they arent even written on paper!
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Posts
8,637
Likes
8,776
AFL Club
Essendon
Correct me if I'm wrong - the statements that Alavi / Charters made to ASADA can still be considered as evidence by the tribunal, right ? (the whole 'not bound by the rules of evidence' business that McDevitt spouted earlier in the week).
Yes. But they would have only slightly more weight than hearsay.

The fact we cant cross examine them is annoying because no doubt ASADA will use their previous testimonies to argue their case.

Im keen to compare the media coverage/reaction of this loss for ASADA and what will happen when Hird loses his appeal bid.
I wonder if the players will produce a sworn statement from Dank that he didn't use TB4 on players. Dank, Charter and Alavi can all provide sworn statements on behalf of the players if they want. I think the reasons ASADA wanted them there is so they can cross examine them after Dank et al come out saying it was thymomodulin.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Posts
42,561
Likes
63,168
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Devon Shields **** Yes
Moderator #41,294
That was my understanding.

But I may be wrong?

I thought they had David Grace QC acting for them and that he was opposing it too.
Actually I think you're right but the fact that Grace was happy for a decision to be made today without reasons says to me that the result was of little concern as they wouldn't be appealing whichever way it went.. or maybe it was pretty obvious to him at that stage which way it would probably go.
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,717
Likes
16,340
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
fret guys - the foamers reckon this is a win for them as the evidence will go through unchallenged. This was a loss for the players!

according to them asada has them on top knowing they gave us bad drugs - forget that both have stated they have NFI what Dank received, let alone have a clue about the players.

This is bad for us!!!

yes the poor dears over there conveniently forget/ignore that the players have the right to cross examine any witness evidence presented against them. So will the Tribunal allow any of these tapes of Alavi & Charter to be presented as evidence? & if they do, how heavily will they discount it as it cannot be challenged?

I could wish ASADA gl, but at this point they can go **** themselves.
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,717
Likes
16,340
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
It's a win, so long as we believe that the tribunal will now have to just about ignore the Charter / Alavi evidence.

If they allow it I dont think they will ignore it, but they would have to weigh what importance they give it considering the players cannot challenge it by cross examination. The Trib would have to discount their evidence to some extent, depends to what extent.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Posts
8,637
Likes
8,776
AFL Club
Essendon
On the admission of the testimony - I assume this wouldn't be allowed in an appeal situation anyway, so why would the tribunal accept it?

Can we say on day 1 - if you allow it, we will appeal immediately so this whole case is a waste of time. See ya
We don't need to do that. On its own without addition witness testimony the evidence is close to worthless.

Something I haven't yet been able to find an answer for yet: If this ends up in the Court of Arbitration for Sport because either side appeal can ASADA call upon Alavi, Dank and Charters, or are they only allowed to rely on evidence and witnesses that have already been heard from?
 

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
yes the poor dears over there conveniently forget/ignore that the players have the right to cross examine any witness evidence presented against them.
Do players actually have any official rights in a tribunal hearing ?

Not being facetious - genuinely curious as to whether player rights are actually codified, or if it's up to the tribunal to run things however it feels like.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom