On Monday morning after Tracey first reported that she’d been threatened with being stabbed with a chopstick, it seems that Richmond’s primary concern was not the victim but damage control.
According to sources close to investigation, Richmond club was keen to contain the story, fearful that the allegation would leak to the media.
The club ordered Martin to phone the victim personally and apologise, one could hypothesise in the hopes that would shut her up.
Other Stories
‘Australia famous for drunks and racists’
‘Australia famous for drunks and racists’
El Chapo: ‘We will destroy you’
El Chapo: ‘We will destroy you’
It’s back! SuperCoach 2016 reveal
It’s back! SuperCoach 2016 reveal
Cops contact Shorten over text drive bust
Cops contact Shorten over text drive bust
Windies top order crumbles as Lyon strikes
Windies top order crumbles as Lyon strikes
According to one source a Richmond officer said to the victim “there must be a better way to deal with it than through the media”.
The club then briefed an accommodating journalist only too happy to reveal not only the name of Tracey’s employer but also her specific role within that organisation.
To identify a victim of violence in such a manner is beyond the pale. It not only needlessly traumatises them but is likely to dissuade other victims from coming forward.
One would have hoped we moved past the ugly old days when victims were intimidated into withdrawing complaints or blamed for the aggressor’s actions with a compliant media happy to spin a story to protect ‘the game’.
Once the case was in the public domain and it was clear that more significant action would be required the victim was visited on her own turf, by a seemingly empathetic integrity officer from the AFL along with a representative from Richmond.
But at that meeting, the victim was given the impression the offence was not viewed as a criminal one.
Then when they presented to the victim her statement from the meeting it is understood she was very unhappy about several “falsifications” that played down the extent of her terror and the seriousness of Martin’s actions.
One AFL officer has since been accused by those close to the victim of essentially monstering her; lambasting her for leaking and talking to the media and repeatedly questioning her evidence saying there were contrary views about how far away Martin stood while he threatened to stab her and what he said.
They insisted that she come to AFL House to give a statement.
At that meeting the AFL representatives were said to be rude.
Tracey was questioned about whether she was sure she wanted to proceed with her claim that Martin threatened to stab her with a chopstick, and warned that if she did they would have to refer it to police and it could potentially end his career.
She was also warned that he could be charged with offences carrying jail time of 10 years. They then reiterated the warnings, giving the victim the impression that they wanted her to water down her complaint.
At no point was the victim encouraged to bring someone with her for support or legal advice.
When the AFL eventually referred the matter to police they did not bother to advise Tracey that they had done so.
On social media an AFL staffer used his private twitter account to release the information instead of the AFL’ s official account which has more than 500,000 followers.
But the most shameful conduct, apart from Martin’s alleged explosion of violence, was to come on Thursday evening when the AFL actively briefed the media against the victim once the case was out of its hands.
One of the investigators who had been the most aggressive towards her told her “we’ve washed our hands of this’’.
How is it that these investigators, who are well credentialed former police officers on significant salaries, could be so ham-fisted in their handling of the case?
An integrity officer is charged with protecting the integrity of the investigation but their primary concern appears to have been to protect the image of the game.
At best the handling of this matter has been incompetent, at worst it has been malicious in intimidating a traumatised victim.
The investigators’ insistence that the offences were minor coupled with pressure exerted on the victim to water down her allegation, with claims that it could land Martin in jail, are utterly unscrupulous.
As soon as the allegations were made why wasn’t it determined that it was a criminal matter that should be immediately referred to police?
Why did the league and the club spend four days needlessly distressing the victim and potentially contaminating the case before they eventually referred it to police?
The police’s performance on this issue, has been almost as woeful.
Why could they not have put in a call to the AFL at the outset, when it was surely clear a potential criminal offence had been committed.
Why did it need the Herald Sun to yesterday point out in its newspaper editorial that police could open an investigation despite not receiving a formal complaint?
It was only after that editorial, and after the Herald Sun online revealed the victim had belatedly been advised that threatening to stab or kill is a criminal offence, that the police got involved.
Also, Richmond being allowed to investigate the matter alongside the AFL, who would later assess if the club acted appropriately, is reminiscent of the ASADA fiasco and shows the AFL has learnt little from that saga.
The AFL may pride itself on being a leading light in changing community attitudes towards women but though it talks a good game about respect and responsibility it fails to live up to even the lowest of expectations.
The culture of cover ups and intimidation has seen the league sell out a victim of violence in a vain attempt to protect the brand.