Scandal Dustin Martin in drunken scuffle

Brown Bottle

Seasoned Campaigner
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Posts
12,372
Likes
8,069
Location
Browntown
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Side Hawks
I don't think he should be facing any criminal sanction without evidence to support a criminal conviction.
That's big of you.

BUT

Given that a serious incident did occur and nobody has come out and refuted the victim's claims I believe there is enough there for the AFL and Richmond to sanction Martin for behaviour that is of an unacceptable standard as an AFL player.
VIC Police have refuted the victim's claims. Imagine the outcry if the AFL or Richmond had returned the same finding!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

blackshadow

Premium Gold
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Posts
22,966
Likes
28,180
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Team WADA
What we wont cop, is a longer sentence or harsher penalty than that of a Bock/Farmer/Franklin/Hodge especially considering he has now done nothing criminally wrong.
Sorry to disappoint you but you will cop whatever sentence the AFL decides on.

What else can you do? Dump a pile of shit on the doors of AFL House?
 

Heisenberg_

Premium Platinum
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Posts
33,713
Likes
36,524
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
I don't think he should be facing any criminal sanction without evidence to support a criminal conviction.

BUT

Given that a serious incident did occur and nobody has come out and refuted the victim's claims I believe there is enough there for the AFL and Richmond to sanction Martin for behaviour that is of an unacceptable standard as an AFL player.
Except for the witnesses in the police investigation which contributed to it getting thrown out that is?
 

Freya

Senior List
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Posts
163
Likes
226
Location
Parramatta
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Ipswich Town
:rolleyes:
Again... you wont find many tigers fans arguing against some form of punishment For being drunk in a public place and causing a scene, adding to the fact that its pre-season.
What we wont cop, is a longer sentence or harsher penalty than that of a Bock/Farmer/Franklin/Hodge especially considering he has now done nothing criminally wrong.
What's criminality got to do with it? What crime did Cousins commit when the Eagles sacked him? The Tigers and AFL have sponsors who won't cop boorish behaviour especially possible threatening behaviour against women in public as per Martin's apology. This is a really big focus of the AFL at the moment.

Things have changed. Farmer and Bock would be rubbed out these days. The Hodge and Franklin cases did not involve possible threats against women so aren't relevant. You can bleat all you want but Dusty is going to get punished, that's guaranteed.

Whoever told him to make that apology absolutely threw him under a bus.
 

Defacto

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Posts
22,934
Likes
16,937
AFL Club
St Kilda
I don't mind at all if people don't want him suspended.

But stating that nothing happened, or worse, implying that the victim has LIED because no criminal charges were laid is central to the problem of violence against women.
agree entirely with that last sentence, but we also need to be mindful of the presumption of innocence and not handing out more serious AFL sanctions based on a feeling without strong evidence... its a delicate balance, which I dont think many have right in this thread. too many extremes
 

Defacto

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Posts
22,934
Likes
16,937
AFL Club
St Kilda
I don't think he should be facing any criminal sanction without evidence to support a criminal conviction.

BUT

Given that a serious incident did occur and nobody has come out and refuted the victim's claims I believe there is enough there for the AFL and Richmond to sanction Martin for behaviour that is of an unacceptable standard as an AFL player.
and what incident was that and what evidence do you have to support it?

this is the issue people are having with the other extreme of the argument
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Tiggytigers

Team Captain
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Posts
548
Likes
942
AFL Club
Richmond
Wouldn't be so sure of that considering he took such exception to being told to stop being a drunken *******.
Have you seen him? Clearly doesn't care what people think about him otherwise he would've gotten rid of that haircut ages ago. And getting angry when someone tells you to stop acting like an idiot doesn't show that he cares what people think of him because if he did care he would've just sat back down and been quite
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2014
Posts
2,895
Likes
5,265
AFL Club
Richmond
The ALF is not obligated to do anything and Richmond are on holiday until mid January. No criminal offence has taken place, and every person has the right to defend their character when taunted and harassed by members of the public.

I'm starting to think the AFL see this for the witch hunt it is.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2010
Posts
1,418
Likes
766
Location
I'm behind you
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
spurs
What do you find so hard to understand about the fact that police cannot lawfully determine as an absolute fact whether a crime did or didn't occur? The best the police can categorically say is that based on our investigations it is our belief that no crime occurred.

Do you understand the difference?
Yes they can. What if I bring allegations against you & as an example upon police investigation it turned out I lied? It doesn't have to proven in court to be stated as fact
 

DrMike

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 13, 2012
Posts
24,945
Likes
55,685
AFL Club
Richmond
Have I suggested he committed a criminal act?

I've just refuted that the police cannot state as fact that no criminal offence occurred, the best they can claim is that based on their investigation they believe that no criminal act occurred - there's a subtle but distinct difference.
1. The outcome is the same in the context of the thread so you're arguing semantics.
2. Back up your claim by providing citations.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Posts
11,394
Likes
8,060
AFL Club
Melbourne
If courts are the only body with the ability to determine whether a crime occurred then every complaint would need to go to the courts. Regardless of evidence
BOTH bodies play a part. To suggest otherwise shows a complete lack of understanding of legal frameworks
 

blackshadow

Premium Gold
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Posts
22,966
Likes
28,180
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Team WADA
1. The outcome is the same in the context of the thread so you're arguing semantics.
2. Back up your claim by providing citations.
1. Too right I'm arguing semantics. Semantics are definitely relevant in discussion on legal matters and when applying scrutiny to media statements.

2. No. Cannot be arsed.
 

DrMike

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 13, 2012
Posts
24,945
Likes
55,685
AFL Club
Richmond
You didn't include that assumption in your post.

How I saw it was that you gave two assumptions only: the accusation was driven by money, the investigation only on purest motives of service of the state.

Weird how two people can see exactly the same set of words in two different ways, even while sober.
This wasn't an assumption, it was a conversation piece which you responded to fairly:
So what story do people believe? The one that has commercial incentive or the one with no commercial incentive and driven by the power of the state for the state?
 
Top Bottom