Mega Thread Day 3 - Ess & Hird v ASADA - Day 2 Summaries in OP - Proceedings #86

[Ari]

I'm pretty sure laymen's opinions don't apply in this case

Well, on Bigfooty they do. It's an opinions forum.

 

[Ari]

Tell that to Gerard Bayden-Clay. He's now serving a life sentence based on circumstantial evidence...where the burden of proof was 'Beyond a reasonable doubt" not "above the balance of probability" so how is it not real?

You may not like it but that doesn't render it invalid unfortunately for Essendon.

Good point re Bayden-Clay.

 

[Ari]

In that scenario Johnny says - mum I didnt eat the cake, I was watching tv the whole time, I can tell you what happenned on the simpsons

Meanwhile Essendon say - were not going to answer questions, we can't prove what we injected etc

In this case there is no dog and Essendon is the logical answer, far more logical than Johnny - the evidence is stronger because there is less chinks in the chain of reasoning

Well, interviewing Dank is like interviewing Dog. Perhaps an admission of guilt will come from Dank that will clear Essendon. And the Chewbecca defence will reign supreme again!

 

[kernelT]

Dear asada & alf.
We are very sori to inform u that our records have somehow been mizplaced.
however we can conferm that nothing band or unhelthy was injectd,
Yors trooly
the bomberz
peece.

 

[Hoochy]

What a lot of cods wallop this is. He said, she said, he took this note, she wrote that note. How is all that nonsense applicable in a court of law? What ever the Judge determines in all of this, are ASADA allowed to do their job or not? No wonder it took them years to get Armstrong (dare I mention that name again) every time something new happens from here on in, and IF the SCN have to be reissued, does that mean Essendon go to court again? I'm starting to rethink my vote on whether they should stay in our competition or not. They are really giving me the whoops now. drugs aside! It's the damned attitudes of those people, and stupid Hird saying he is relieved he was able to say the truth in court....what flipping truth??? We already knew all the crap that went on. Nothing new was there? Too many bullies in the AFL by all accounts, or should I say egos? However, I think ASADA needs to do what it is there for and nail these people. Bottom line, it does make a joke of the Anti doping board in Australia. Oh well, next it will be Medicare, WADA, possibly Customs, Police, lost track now of who is out for blood..lots of time in court for Essendon by the sounds of things.

 

[D-N-R]

Then kicked into the Yarra. Appalling piece of police ASADA brutality.

Did he float like a duck?

 

[Tomjas00]

But this case has nothing to do with convictions.

So your mate hasn't raised enough cash for his own summer house yet then

Ha ha

Only a unit - he's a solicitor not a SC

 

[hirdylloydy1]

What a lot of cods wallop this is. He said, she said, he took this note, she wrote that note. How is all that nonsense applicable in a court of law? What ever the Judge determines in all of this, are ASADA allowed to do their job or not? No wonder it took them years to get Armstrong (dare I mention that name again) every time something new happens from here on in, and IF the SCN have to be reissued, does that mean Essendon go to court again? I'm starting to rethink my vote on whether they should stay in our competition or not. They are really giving me the whoops now. drugs aside! It's the damned attitudes of those people, and stupid Hird saying he is relieved he was able to say the truth in court....what flipping truth??? We already knew all the crap that went on. Nothing new was there? Too many bullies in the AFL by all accounts, or should I say egos? However, I think ASADA needs to do what it is there for and nail these people. Bottom line, it does make a joke of the Anti doping board in Australia. Oh well, next it will be Medicare, WADA, possibly Customs, Police, lost track now of who is out for blood..lots of time in court for Essendon by the sounds of things.

Your interwebz vote? Oh noes....

 

[BlueWorld]

Do you actually know why we're doing that?

Because Essendon cannot prove that they DIDN'T take banned substances. And Asada don't need to prove that they did, only that they could have. That they operated in an environment where they could have. And then SC notices are issued to players to prove their innocence. So there's no innocent until proven guilty here, quite the opposite. And if Essendon players could prove that they did not take banned substances, then they would be demonstrating suitable governance. Of course, if they could do that they would not have received a cop last year of 2m and missing out on finals.

But at a later stage ASADA will be required to prove they did. It's only in responding to the SC that players need to prove that an infraction should not be issued.

 

[Ari]

Ultimately this case has shown me two things.

1. Asada's SC notices are built mainly on Dank's TB4 supply chain as opposed to player testimony.

2. The only guy who can get Essendon out of this mess is Dank, should he be able to show with absolute certainly that the TB4 he ordered did not end up with Essendon players.

PS: And that Hird is a tubby little thing.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Reid wrote a letter voicing concerns about WADA compliance. Oh dear!!

And James was "disappointed" in David Evans.

Cross James at your own peril. And sometimes I reckon would wouldn't even realize you crossed him.

 

[BlueWorld]

Happy that we were given a trial and one where the evidence is out in the open. Will be the first of many court cases.

What evidence was out in the open? It was all about process and technicality.

 

[Ari]

But at a later stage ASADA will be required to prove they did. It's only in responding to the SC that players need to prove that an infraction should not be issued.

Which they most likely cannot do for two reasons.

1. Poor governance and reporting of what they actually took by the club, Dank etc.
2. They've advised in interviews with Asada that they do not know what they took. So cannot now come back and say specifically what they took, which is what the SC's would most likely require.

 

[Tomjas00]

Ultimately this case has shown me two things.

1. Asada's SC notices are built mainly on Dank's TB4 supply chain as opposed to player testimony.

2. The only guy who can get Essendon out of this mess is Dank, should he be able to show with absolute certainly that the TB4 he ordered did not end up with Essendon players.

PS: And that Hird is a tubby little thing.

I expect that you are correct

Drug agencies are like the tax office - you're guilty until you prove yourself innocent

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

So what happens now? Are they continuing tomorrow or did they get all they needed done in the 3 days?

 

[imperial_oz]

Seemed like a very good day. Middleton talking a lot about the nature of relief and making sure that ASADA collect evidence lawfully if relief is given and it extends to setting aside SC notices

The corruption of the AFL was on display for all who care about these things to see

The incompetence of the nations anti doping body was exposed along with it's arrogance wrt to following the rules. Again, for those who care about these things

If inv. continues and SC notices are issued let's hope that ASADA do the right thing this time and allow the players to see the evidence against them before responding. I personally think the evidence is flimsy based on McDevitt's desperate fishing exercise and what ASADA and AFL seemed to say after the interim report.

Wow, way to rewrite history and demonstrate your total lack of understanding of what is happening.

The allegation that ASADA has acted illegally has not been accepted by Middleton at this point and his comments were not to do with making sure ASADA acts legally. His comments reflected the view that Justice Middleton does not want the evidence collected lost. If and only if he decides that the evidence used by ASADA was collected unlawfully and is thereby tainted as a result, he may order the SCNs to be void and need to be reissued. If there is no taint then he may allow evidence even if it is unclear whether the Act allows for such a close connection between ASADA and the AFL.

ASADA has been the subject of accusations, none of which have yet been accepted as having merit. Your comment about their incompetence being exposed is just wrong. If the decision goes against Essendon and that is entirely possible then ASADA is going to come out looking pretty good. Its all based on different interpretations of the enabling legislation and ASADA's QC did a pretty good job of clearing up much of the ambiguities.

Your comment about the players being given the evidence is also so far off the mark its borderline hilarious.

No players have been charged with anything. No players have been accused of anything. The SCNs are a part of the investigation not a part of any disciplinary process. It is analogous to questions being put to a person under investigation. ie We have reason to believe you have taken XXX. Here is your chance to have input into the process. Players can choose to respond or not respond and any response is considered BEFORE any allegations are made

No investigative agency reveals what is gathered as part of any investigation while it is ongoing. Thats how investigations get frustrated by those with something to hide.

If and only IF a player is issued with an Infringement Notice (which is an allegation of illicit activity) will he be given access to the evidence on which that allegation is based as this part of the facets of natural justice. Natural justice is one of the most important elements of Justice Middleton's task right now and it's not just justice for the players but natural justice for ASADA also.

Put your conspiracy theorist stuff to one side and look at what is actually going on. This point has been explained many times but the repeated cries of 'show us the evidence' is totally out of place.

Looking at your comments, I feel you are in line for some massive disappointments in the not too distant future.

 

[FuManchu]

And James was "disappointed" in David Evans.

Cross James at your own peril. And sometimes I reckon would wouldn't even realize you crossed him.

He will put a hexarelin on you.

 

[D-N-R]

Either way...
Chris Kaias @ChrisKaias · 16s
Middleton says problem he's worried about, making sure any order he makes doesn't prevent getting same information lawfully next time.

My reading of this statement was that he judge doesn't want to make an order which nullifies any co-operation between ASADA and sporting bodies in the future. If he rules that ASADA have misinterpreted the Act or acted outside what it is meant to do - rather than ruling on them breaking the rules by providing an interim report - this may have consequences for sharing / gathering information between other sports bodies.

Thought??

 

[BlueWorld]

No

Just one of a few predictable steps in the process e.g. you can almost guarantee than any convictions will be appealed to relevant authorities

As someone else said : "Wheels of justice turn slowly"

If you mean bans, once players are banned they can't compete. Wheels of justice may turn slowly but that won't help them get back to competing once they are banned.

 

[BlueWorld]

I have no idea if a joint investigation is legal or otherwise. I was pointing out that keeping an organisation like the AFL at arms length during an investigation is a good idea because they have a conflict of interest and may try to corrupt the process.

On the other hand, allowing a joint investigation can also serve to halt a corrupt sporting organisation. The AFL tried to corrupt ASADA and ultimately failed (unless this court case gets enough critical evidence struck out). If the ASADA was left to trust the AFL to ask the right questions and act appropriately then the evidence may have disappeared by the time the AFL reports back (if done at arms length). Keeping the untrustworthy entity close, ie. AFL can also minimise corruption.

But the main reason was the lack of coercive powers available to ASADA at that stage at least and having to rely on the AFL for that. That's the way the act was set up so how could ASADA interview the players without coercive powers which AFAIK relied on working with the AFL and sporting bodies.

 

[BlueWorld]

The players cant say what they were injected with how is that self incriminating.

It is because the WADA code says they are responsible for all substances entering their body and if they cannot say they have already broken the WADA code, so if there is evidence of a banned substance and they can't say what they are injected with they are in trouble.

 

[D-N-R]

Which they most likely cannot do for two reasons.

1. Poor governance and reporting of what they actually took by the club, Dank etc.
2. They've advised in interviews with Asada that they do not know what they took. So cannot now come back and say specifically what they took, which is what the SC's would most likely require.

The interviews with the players is probably to do with the frequency of injections and numbers to try and match this up with the vials and dosages reported in other documents. Not being able to say what they took and not having the documentation to back it up is also an offence. It will be interesting to see if ASADA push this as a punishment as well. (The club and staff have been punished for this, but the players haven't really copped their whack. If ASADA can't get them on one thing, they may try for this breach.)

 

[BlueWorld]

Is there a summary of the days proceedings that I can find anywhere? I don't particularly want to read page after page of this thread (yes I'm lazy). Would appreciate anyone that can summarise what happened

http://sociallitigator.com/2014/08/13/report-day-3-essendon-football-club-hird-v-asada/

 

[Frank Grimes]

Now that the trial is over, how long do we wait until Middleton comes down with a verdict?

 

[Graffy4242]

Wow, way to rewrite history and demonstrate your total lack of understanding of what is happening.

The allegation that ASADA has acted illegally has not been accepted by Middleton at this point and his comments were not to do with making sure ASADA acts legally. His comments reflected the view that Justice Middleton does not want the evidence collected lost. If and only if he decides that the evidence used by ASADA was collected unlawfully and is thereby tainted as a result, he may order the SCNs to be void and need to be reissued. If there is no taint then he may allow evidence even if it is unclear whether the Act allows for such a close connection between ASADA and the AFL.

ASADA has been the subject of accusations, none of which have yet been accepted as having merit. Your comment about their incompetence being exposed is just wrong. If the decision goes against Essendon and that is entirely possible then ASADA is going to come out looking pretty good. Its all based on different interpretations of the enabling legislation and ASADA's QC did a pretty good job of clearing up much of the ambiguities.

Your comment about the players being given the evidence is also so far off the mark its borderline hilarious.

No players have been charged with anything. No players have been accused of anything. The SCNs are a part of the investigation not a part of any disciplinary process. It is analogous to questions being put to a person under investigation. ie We have reason to believe you have taken XXX. Here is your chance to have input into the process. Players can choose to respond or not respond and any response is considered BEFORE any allegations are made

No investigative agency reveals what is gathered as part of any investigation while it is ongoing. Thats how investigations get frustrated by those with something to hide.

If and only IF a player is issued with an Infringement Notice (which is an allegation of illicit activity) will he be given access to the evidence on which that allegation is based as this part of the facets of natural justice. Natural justice is one of the most important elements of Justice Middleton's task right now and it's not just justice for the players but natural justice for ASADA also.

Put your conspiracy theorist stuff to one side and look at what is actually going on. This point has been explained many times but the repeated cries of 'show us the evidence' is totally out of place.

Looking at your comments, I feel you are in line for some massive disappointments in the not too distant future.

I'm sorry but that is WAY too many words for Telsa to understand. Can you perhaps draw him a picture or just a few bullet points?