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

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hoochy said:
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.
Click to expand...
I believe Workcover is investigating from an OHS perspective.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

DonsRule said:
Objection. Incorrect use of sight. This witness is misleading the court.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that whether Essendon or Hird sought to self-report or initiate the investigation is almost irrelevant? Isn't it true that regardless of this fact ASADA is required to conduct the investigation according to law?

I personally don't see the relevance in whether Essendon asked for the investigation or not? It was either conducted lawfully or it wasn't?

Or am I missing something here?
 
phoenix77 said:
My understanding is that whether Essendon or Hird sought to self-report or initiate the investigation is almost irrelevant? Isn't it true that regradless of this fact ASADA is required to conduct the investigation according to law?

I personally don't see the relevance in whether Essendon asked for the investigation or not? It was either conducted lawfully or it wasn't?

Or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

I think that goes towards relief.

If he finds that they conducted the investigation unlawfully, BUT that Essendon asked for the investigation ( and never raised questions/issues about it while it was happening) , then while he may rule the investigation as illegal he may not injunct the evidence (interviews/phone records etc) and not stop the SC notices.

I probably didn't use a single correct legal word, but I think that the jist of it. There's two sides to his judgement: whether the investigation was legal, and if it wasn't, whether he should invalidate everything.
 
Devington said:
I think that goes towards relief.

If he finds that they conducted the investigation unlawfully, BUT that Essendon asked for the investigation ( and never raised questions/issues about it while it was happening) , then while he may rule the investigation as illegal he may not injunct the evidence (interviews/phone records etc) and not stop the SC notices.

I probably didn't use a single correct legal word, but I think that the jist of it. There's two sides to his judgement: whether the investigation was legal, and if it wasn't, whether he should invalidate everything.
Click to expand...


OH! Cheers.
 
The players can't tell what they were injected with. They can only say they were injected.

So if they say combined they were injected 1600 times (guessing), then ASADA goes over the records to see with what. And if they find substantial evidence what they were injected with, then they are gone.

And of course if Dank provides no evidence the TB4 went anywhere else, they are especially gone.
 
Armchair Critic said:
Chris Kaias @ChrisKaias · 49m
I thought I'd be posting something more in depth but just finished teaching a class and I'm exhausted. Will post tomorrow instead.


Chris Kaias @ChrisKaias · 48m
But as a preview, before the case started I thought ASADA would win. I now think it's too close to call
Click to expand...

I'm open to being biased but after attending the Federal Court today my thoughts are that the investigation thus far will be deemed unlawful. Which will be pleasing, though will prolong the entire process...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Argy said:
A month.
Click to expand...
How many years has the EFC and its "pharmacologically experimental environment" and "supplements scandal" and aftermath impacted, overshadowed and tainted the AFL competition so far?

2011, 2012, 2013, 2014+? Four years and counting, at least. Thanks a bunch EFC!

I hope that the general football public (ie non-Essendon supporters) just boycotts any games involving Essendon. Hit the EFC and the AFL where it hurts most - the revenue stream.

Enough is enough of this sorry saga and the constant delaying, obstruction and obfuscation.
 
phoenix77 said:
My understanding is that whether Essendon or Hird sought to self-report or initiate the investigation is almost irrelevant? Isn't it true that regardless of this fact ASADA is required to conduct the investigation according to law?

I personally don't see the relevance in whether Essendon asked for the investigation or not? It was either conducted lawfully or it wasn't?

Or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...
It's relevant in that they accepted the joint investigation from the start but then decided to complain about it once they didn't like the outcome. ASADA's argument being that they had no right to complain about it when they had asked for it and accepted it from the beginning.
 
RegHickeyStand said:
The players can't tell what they were injected with. They can only say they were injected.

So if they say combined they were injected 1600 times (guessing), then ASADA goes over the records to see with what. And if they find substantial evidence what they were injected with, then they are gone.

And of course if Dank provides no evidence the TB4 went anywhere else, they are especially gone.
Click to expand...

Fair statement, do you think it's that simple?

I thought that the inability to individually verify or prove anyone's use of anything would hold us in relatively good stead.
 
phoenix77 said:
Fair statement, do you think it's that simple?

I thought that the inability to individually verify or prove anyone's use of anything would hold us in relatively good stead.
Click to expand...
Good grief.:rolleyes: So keeping no records and/or destroying them is the key to getting out of doping violations. Good lesson for every team all over the world.:rolleyes:

I think i have the answer to my earlier question. You clearly are totally clueless.
 
BlueWorld said:
Based on what? The team you support?
Click to expand...

No of course not! Apologies, I have gone into some detail on another page on this site, tonight is my first time writing on this site and so am still feeling my way around. I by no means profess to be an expert but my feeling after viewing this matter is that it will be deemed unlawful due to a number of key facts, namely: the AFL had no right to be present during questioning, ASADA had no right to utilise the AFL's power to compel players and staff to respond, ASADA had no right to share such findings (interim report) as this was confidential...

All just my opinion of course, and am open to being biased, but hope that I'm intellectually capable of being more than blindingly hopeful.
 
Last edited:
two questions I've got after all this
1. If what Hird alleges is true basically that Essendon got tipped off by Vlad how does this adversely affect Essendon?
2. If Essendon wins their case but SCN, infraction notices and bans still follow will players now be unable to receive a discount for co-operating when it was suggested they only gave interviews as they were compelled to by the AFL
 
phoenix77 said:
No of course not! Apologies, I have gone into some detail on another page on this site, tonight is my first time writing on this site and so am still feeling my way around. I by no means profess to be an expert but my feeling after viewing this matter is that it will be deemed unlawful due to a number of key facts, namely: the AFL had no right to be present during questioning, ASADA had no right to utilise the AFL's power to compel players and staff to respond, ASADA had no right to share such findings (interim report) as this was confidential...

All just my opinion of course, and am open to being bias, but hope that I'm intellectually capable of being more than blindingly hopeful.
Click to expand...


Good luck with that champ.
 
BlueWorld said:
Good grief.:rolleyes: So keeping no records and/or destroying them is the key to getting out of doping violations. Good lesson for every team all over the world.:rolleyes:

I think i have the answer to my earlier question. You clearly are totally clueless.
Click to expand...


If we used PE substances then we deserve to be punished. Pure and simple. But any such process must certainly adhere to and abide by relevant legislation. Pure and simple. I can accept any outcome as long it is procured fairly and justly.

Yes of course my view will be swayed, I am passionate about my team, as I would hope you are about yours; Does this mean that I would seek to conduct ourselves in an illegal / unjust fashion? Of course not, but I can assure you that this whole saga, when looked at in its entirety, is not as clear cut as you presume, nearly everything has been mismanaged from the outset. In this society, you should be innocent until proven guilty.
 
phoenix77 said:
Fair statement, do you think it's that simple?

I thought that the inability to individually verify or prove anyone's use of anything would hold us in relatively good stead.
Click to expand...
Legally, I have got no idea. What I said just made sense to me on how I would form an opinion. I would eliminate everything I could then consider what is left.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat
Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
716
Satan
Satan
CASEYS9420
Moved Thread James Hird - is it time to give him a second chance at coaching an AFL club? Gil says yes! - The PEDs Forum Version
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
Caligo
Caligo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top