Gil and Fitzpatrick Named in Writ -- the saga

I Rock

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 3, 2005
13,392
18,374
At Home
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
L.A. Kings, Oakland Raiders
Doesn't matter what our official story was, we still got the punishments.
Remember when Essendon first came out publically and said they knew the program ran close to the wind, however was sure it did not fall over the line. Then the official stance became we just don’t know. Remember when the initial AFL findings made reference to Essendon using banned substances…..

See how those pieces might cause headaches. If the current case can go to Court on breaches against Members of Essendon. Imagine the potential case Members of 17 other Clubs could proceed with against Essendon. That's just one example.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

evo

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 29, 2003
28,165
19,125
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Further claims: Part C

1 On 7 January 2017 it was publicly reported in numerous media outlets that James Hird had been hospitalised following what was reported to have been an attempted suicide. Subsequent media reports indicated that Mr Hird had been transferred from hospital to a mental health facility.

2 The media reporting around Mr Hird’s reported attempted suicide generated significant concern in the community.

3 Subsequent media reporting covered allegations that Mr Hird had been the victim of bullying and victimisation by the AFL.

4 A significant body of empirical evidence supports a causal link between bullying and suicide, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts, among other serious adverse mental health effects.

5 Bullying is a serious problem in Australia, and a matter of serious concern to the community.
Oh FFS
 

Bunk Moreland

Hall of Famer
Sep 22, 2011
31,359
60,893
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
Schedule C

1 On 9 February 2013 ASADA officials including ASADA chief executive Aurora Andruska met AFL officials, including Gillon McLachlan, and others. During
the meeting, McLachlan stated words to the effect:


Come to arrangement: Players found to be innocent - duped. This is the outcome.

2 On 4 June 2013 ASADA officials including Aurora Andruska had a discussion with Glenys Beauchamp, deputy secretary of the department of sport.

During the discussion, Beauchamp referred to a deal with [the] AFL:

support staff sacked, points off, players off

3 On 26 June 2013 Gillon McLachlan had a telephone discussion with Aurora Andruska. During the discussion, McLachlan spoke to Andruska about the preparation of a report by ASADA for the AFL on the Joint Investigation. Referring to the report, McLachlan stated:

Take points off Essendon. Need detail to get through that. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need

4 On 16 July 2013 AFL Integrity Manager Brett Clothier had a meeting with ASADA officials to discuss the Interim Report. During the meeting, Clothier said words to the effect he wanted the Interim Report:

assembled in a way that paints a picture of an uncontrolled environment at Essendon

5 In the interviews conducted by ASADA in the Joint Investigation, ASADA re-interviewed a number of witnesses to allow them to respond to evidence given by persons in other interviews. ASADA did not extend that same opportunity to Essendon coach James Hird.

6 Actions of Brett Clothier

(a) Information given by Brett Clothier was contained in an email sent by Clothier to ASADA investigators on 17 July 2013, and was to the effect that:

At a meeting between Clothier, James Hird, Essendon employees Danny Corcoran and Paul Hamilton in 2011 (the 2011 Meeting), Clothier had warned Hird that peptides were a serious risk to the integrity of the AFL, and he had implored Hird to report to the AFL any information he came across relating to peptides.

(b) Clothier’s information was false in that he had not given that warning to Hird either in the terms alleged, or at all.

(c) Clothier’s knowledge of the falsity of the information he gave to ASADA may be inferred from:

(i) the fact that a media outlet published the substance of Clothier’s information before Clothier had sent it to ASADA;

(ii) the fact that earlier in 2013, Clothier attended his first formal interview with ASADA investigators and Clothier made no mention of the warning to Hird on peptides at any stage during his interview;

(iii) Clothier’s contemporaneous notes of the 2011 Meeting record no mention of a warning to Hird on peptides;

(iv) the contemporaneous notes of Paul Roland contain no reference to Clothier having given a warning to Hird on peptides;

(v) the surrounding circumstances including:

(a) the AFL’s purpose as stated by Gillon McLachlan at his 4 June 2013 meeting with ASADA for “support staff” to be “sacked”;
(b) the fact that ASADA, which had extended the opportunity to other witnesses to be re-interviewed to respond to information, did not extend the opportunity to James Hird to respond to the information provided by Clothier.
 

Bunk Moreland

Hall of Famer
Sep 22, 2011
31,359
60,893
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
Schedule 4

Asked if the AFL's conduct had contributed to last month's crisis (condition of James Hird), McLachlan bluntly replied:

"I just think that's entirely unfair”

(1) The conduct of the AFL exposing Mr Hird to public vilification included:

(a) officially attributing the management oversight failures for one of the largest scandals in the history of Australian sport to only three individuals, including Mr Hird, by:

(i) sanctioning only those three individuals, including Mr Hird, in relation to those failures;

(ii) not sanctioning other individuals whose actions and/or omissions had contributed to exposing players participating in the Essendon Supplements Program to the risk of harm; and

(iii) repeatedly and publicly disclaiming that the AFL and/or its officers and employees themselves bore any significant fault, or any fault at all, fothe exposure of AFL Players to harm by practices of sports science and medicine in the AFL Competition, including the Essendon
Supplements Program;

(b) deciding that Mr Hird was to be the ‘public face’ of that scandal, as was communicated to Mr Hird by AFL Legal Counsel Andrew Dillon at a meeting attended by Mr Dillon and Gillon McLachlan with Mr Hird and Mr Hird’s lawyer held at Mr McLachlan’s home on 25 August 2015 (the 25 August Meeting);

(c) deciding that the sanction which the AFL required Mr Hird to agree pursuant to the Disciplinary Process was one that was to meet the need for the AFL to control ‘the optics’ of the scandal, as was communicated to Mr Hird by Gillon McLachlan at the 25 August Meeting;

(d) taking steps to ensure that Mr Hird was in fact the public face of the scandal, including by way of:


(i) leaking information unfavourable to Mr Hird to media outlets, including information in respect of which the AFL was bound by obligations of
confidentiality;

(ii) leaking to a media outlet the information of Brett Clothier (the Clothier Information), referred to in Schedule 3, which:

(A) was highly damaging to Mr Hird;

(B) led to media coverage and commentary that was highly critical of Mr Hird;

(C) was false; and

(D) as referred to at paragraph 16.5, was information given to ASADA by Mr Clothier knowing that it was false; and

(iii) making threats against Mr Hird to cause him to accept a disciplinary sanction from the AFL Commission of a 12 month suspension from
involvement in the AFL Competition; and

(e) releasing to the public the Notice of Charge in the Disciplinary Proceedings against Mr Hird (and the other persons charged in the Disciplinary Proceedings), which included the Clothier Information.

(2) The conduct of the AFL exposing Mr Hird to suffering feelings of distress and/or humiliation included:

(a) the AFL scheduling a press conference to announce a seven year broadcasting rights agreement to coincide on the same day with Mr Hird’s announcement of his resignation from Essendon;

(b) Gillon McLachlan choosing to state at the AFL press conference that followed by a matter of hours Mr Hird’s public and tearful resignation:

It is a great day for our game”.

(4) The conduct of the AFL exposing Mr Hird to public ridicule included releasing to the public the Notice of Charge in the Disciplinary Proceedings against Mr Hird, which included un-redacted allegations that Mr Hird had suffered side effects from administering a named substance. By reason of the AFL not redacting the name of that substance, and not redacting the reference to Mr Hird suffering side effects from its use, Mr Hird became an object of public ridicule, because the side effects of the named substance were easily discoverable from public sources and included side effects of a personally intimate and embarrassing nature.

The linkages between bullying behaviours and adverse mental health outcomes, including those pleaded at paragraph 66.2, are evidenced by significant literature in the form of academic research and studies and research reports of mental health organisations and other bodies, including:

(a) a 2012 publication of the Commonwealth Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Employment titled: “Workplace Bullying: We Just Want it to Stop”;

(b) a 2014 publication commissioned by the Australian mental health advocacy and support organisation, Beyond Blue, from the Centre for Health Initiatives at the University of Wollongong, titled ‘Workplace Bullying in Australia’: and

(c) the studies and publications referenced in each of the publications referred to at sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) above.

Mr McLachlan’s recklessness is to be inferred from the facts that:

(a) Mr McLachlan held the position of Chief Executive Officer of an important national institution, the AFL;

(b) Mr Hird’s condition was and had been from the time it became public a matter of serious concern to the community;

(c) there had been significant reporting and debate in the media locally and nationally on the question of whether the AFL had contributed to Mr Hird’s
condition;

(d) Mr McLachlan knew, or would have discovered on making reasonable enquiries, that the AFL had engaged in conduct towards Mr Hird that
included conduct of the nature described;

(e) had Mr McLachlan made reasonable enquiries, he would have discovered the existence of credible information linking conduct of the nature described with the consequences referred to.

(f) there was a significant quantity of public information easily available to Mr McLachlan — including reports, research, community and employer
education materials and websites — describing the risks of conduct of the nature referred to at paragraph 66.1 and its links to consequences of the
nature referred to at paragraph 66.2;

(g) the information at paragraph (f) included information that a person occupying an office such as that which Mr McLachlan held, at an institution of the national importance of the AFL, ought to be aware of;

(h) the AFL itself had published materials, including on websites controlled by the AFL or its affiliates, discussing bullying behaviours and the risks
associated with those behaviours;

(i) the AFL had promulgated rules and policies ostensibly addressing bullying behaviours, including the ‘Australian Football Member Protection Policy’ dated August 2013;

(j) Mr McLachlan had not made any public statement on Mr Hird's condition in the approximately 32 days prior

(k) the statement was the entirety of the statement made by Mr McLachlan on Mr Hird's condition;

(l) the statement was made in a statement distributed by the Australian Associated Press that shielded Mr McLachlan from being questioned on it;

(m) had Mr McLachlan admitted to the truth of the facts about which his opinion was expressed — that truth being that conduct by the AFL could in fact have contributed to Mr Hird’s condition — that admission would likely have had material adverse consequences on the AFL’s standing with consumers, the AFL’s relationships with commercial sponsors and partners, and on the AFL’s brand.
 

blue harvest

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 11, 2008
9,850
12,030
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
4. Player Welfare

Claims

A) the AFL did not bear no responsibility, and

B) the AFL did not bear only limited responsibility for the exposure of players to any risks to their health and safety from the Essendon Supplements Program,
but rather:

(C) the AFL contributed to the exposure of players to risks to their health and safety from the Essendon Supplements Program; and further

(D) the AFL contributed significantly to the exposure of players to risks to their health and safety from the Essendon Supplements Program, by the AFL’s failure:


(a) at any time before September 2012, to regulate (other than as provided by the AFL’s anti-doping policy):
(i) the use of peptides;
(ii) the use of other substances that were not prohibited by the AFL’s anti-doping policy but potentially harmful;
(iii) the administration of treatments by injection;
(iv) the sourcing of substances used in treatments administered to players;
(v) the record keeping of substances used in treatments administered to players;
(vi) the personnel permitted to supply treatments administered to players;
(vii) the personnel permitted to administer treatments to players;

(b) at any time before September 2012 and after being notified by Essendon club doctor Dr Bruce Reid of concerns that Dr Reid had about the Essendon Supplements Program, to regulate (i)-(vii)

(c) at any time before September 2012 and after the AFL’s general manager of football operations wrote to clubs expressing the AFL’s concerns about sports science and medicine practices in the AFL Competition, to regulate (i) - (vii)

(d) at any time before September 2012 and after the AFL obtained information about the Essendon Supplements Program that led to
samples from Essendon players being sent to a laboratory in Germany for testing, to regulate (i) - (vii)

(e) to inform Essendon, or Essendon players of the substance of that information obtained by the AFL, that led to samples from Essendon players being sent to a laboratory in Germany for testing ;
Going down this path of blaming the AFL for Essendon's failings is drawing a very long bow and will open more cans of worms.

Blaming the AFL for not regulating
(v) the record keeping of substances used in treatments administered to players;
is laughable.
The Bombers were hiding the program, bypassing their own Doctor, getting players to sign confidentiality contracts, lying on drug test declarations, altering invoices etc but somehow the AFL are to blame for not having a record keeping regime?

These claims are just going to open up a whole world of pain again for the Bombers. It will all be public again, the papers will have a field day. Doc Reid's letter, Jobe's comments about his concern over the huge number of injections, the Thymomodulin bottle, Zaharakis saying no, Charter's relationship with Hird, 'the financials for you and David', payouts that have already been made, Medicare fraud, the AFL telling Hird in 2011 to forget about peptides, AOD, etc etc. And in the end it will probably be shown that the AFL were doing enough in the area of player welfare, it was just certain people at Essendon breaking the rules.

Does this lawyer guy have any relationship with Essendon? Maybe he hates Essendon, that would actually make more sense.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bunk Moreland

Hall of Famer
Sep 22, 2011
31,359
60,893
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
Going down this path of blaming the AFL for Essendon's failings is drawing a very long bow and will open more cans of worms.

Blaming the AFL for not regulating
(v) the record keeping of substances used in treatments administered to players;
is laughable.
The Bombers were hiding the program, bypassing their own Doctor, getting players to sign confidentiality contracts, lying on drug test declarations, altering invoices etc but somehow the AFL are to blame for not having a record keeping regime?

These claims are just going to open up a whole world of pain again for the Bombers. It will all be public again, the papers will have a field day. Doc Reid's letter, Jobe's comments about his concern over the huge number of injections, the Thymomodulin bottle, Zaharakis saying no, Charter's relationship with Hird, 'the financials for you and David', payouts that have already been made, Medicare fraud, the AFL telling Hird in 2011 to forget about peptides, AOD, etc etc. And in the end it will probably be shown that the AFL were doing enough in the area of player welfare, it was just certain people at Essendon breaking the rules.

Does this lawyer guy have any relationship with Essendon? Maybe he hates Essendon, that would actually make more sense.
I think his motivations can be inferred. If it got up it’d be a huge boost to his profile. And he’d be in the box seat to lead some very lucrative cases representing any number of people who were disadvantaged by the misleading/deceptive behaviour.
 

I Rock

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 3, 2005
13,392
18,374
At Home
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
L.A. Kings, Oakland Raiders
So Essendon being found guilty by the highest possible Sports Body in the World and Mr Hird being the Coach at the time who was clearly shown to instigate the program should have been left alone......


Hird didn't even lose his job as a result of the Program, he lost it by not being a very good Coach. This would go down IMO as the worst attempt to rewrite History through the Courts had Hird himself not already achieved that accolade on his own. Nobody is suggesting (at least you would hope not) what happened to Hird since is a good thing. However you can’t just let people carry on in a system that they are used to being protected by, when it’s clear they have done wrong.
 

DapperDon

Waiting for Essendon to arrive
Oct 4, 2006
30,078
45,159
AFL Club
Essendon
So Essendon being found guilty by the highest possible Sports Body in the World and Mr Hird being the Coach at the time who was clearly shown to instigate the program should have been left alone......


Hird didn't even lose his job as a result of the Program, he lost it by not being a very good Coach. This would go down IMO as the worst attempt to rewrite History through the Courts had Hird himself not already achieved that accolade on his own. Nobody is suggesting (at least you would hope not) what happened to Hird since is a good thing. However you can’t just let people carry on in a system that they are used to being protected by, when it’s clear they have done wrong.
You do know Hird isn't involved with this yeah?

Before you go on a big tanty
 

Ron The Bear

Heartbreakers, with your 44
Jul 4, 2006
29,726
27,591
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Claim

It was not entirely unfair to ask whether the AFL had contributed to Mr Hird's condition, because:

1. In the years prior to Mr Hird’s condition, the AFL engaged in conduct towards Mr Hird that included:
(a) conduct exposing Mr Hird to public vilification;
(b) conduct exposing Mr Hird to social exclusion;
(c) conduct exposing Mr Hird to suffering feelings of distress and/or humiliation; and/or
(d) conduct exposing Mr Hird to public ridicule.


2. There is credible evidence to suggest that conduct of the nature engaged in by the AFL may:
(a) contribute to the occurrence of depression;
(b) contribute to the occurrence of suicidal thoughts;
(c) contribute to the occurrence of suicide attempts; and
(d) contribute to the occurrence of suicide,
in persons exposed to conduct of that nature.
But who drove Bomber to ladyboys?
 

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Apr 24, 2013
47,832
89,680
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
(i) sanctioning only those three individuals, including Mr Hird, in relation to those failures;

(ii) not sanctioning other individuals whose actions and/or omissions had contributed to exposing players participating in the Essendon Supplements Program to the risk of harm;


Who are these people?

(iii) repeatedly and publicly disclaiming that the AFL and/or its officers and employees themselves bore any significant fault, or any fault at all, for the exposure of AFL Players to harm by practices of sports science and medicine in the AFL Competition, including the Essendon
Supplements Program


What is the argument behind this?

(i) leaking information unfavourable to Mr Hird to media outlets, including information in respect of which the AFL was bound by obligations of
confidentiality;

(ii) leaking to a media outlet the information of Brett Clothier (the Clothier Information), referred to in Schedule 3, which:

(A) was highly damaging to Mr Hird;

(B) led to media coverage and commentary that was highly critical of Mr Hird;

(C) was false; and

(D) as referred to at paragraph 16.5, was information given to ASADA by Mr Clothier knowing that it was false; and

Where is the proof?

(iii) making threats against Mr Hird to cause him to accept a disciplinary sanction from the AFL Commission of a 12 month suspension from
involvement in the AFL Competition; and

Threat? Seriously? Where's the threat?

The linkages between bullying behaviours and adverse mental health outcomes, including those pleaded at paragraph 66.2, are evidenced by significant literature in the form of academic research and studies and research reports of mental health organisations and other bodies, including:

(a) a 2012 publication of the Commonwealth Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Employment titled: “Workplace Bullying: We Just Want it to Stop”;

(b) a 2014 publication commissioned by the Australian mental health advocacy and support organisation, Beyond Blue, from the Centre for Health Initiatives at the University of Wollongong, titled ‘Workplace Bullying in Australia’: and

(c) the studies and publications referenced in each of the publications referred to at sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) above.


Literally PMSL!




 

blue harvest

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 11, 2008
9,850
12,030
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Wow, looking through all those claims, this is going to take years, that lawyer guy is mad.
If these were all upheld then every problem ever encountered by anyone in this country could be blamed on some sort of organisation.
 

Top Bottom