Scandal Hawthorn player questioned over sexual offence allegation

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pleaded guilty to a lesser charge. No conviction recorded. Don't re-write history.
When the Saints stood him down there had been no deal and he had not been convicted of anything. I'm not trying to portray Milne as an angel, but contrasting the behaviour of the two clubs. North would not have suffered at all by cutting Daw loose, and it's to their credit that they have not done so.

The context of course, is how clubs should treat players who have pending but unproven allegations made against them.
 
From what I have heard, there was a lot of pressure from the AFL to suspend him until the outcome, our club said said no. We said he would play if he was available and required, AFL removed him from all promotional commitments though.

...

He is innocent until proven guilty. An allegation or charge doesn't mean guilt in our system of justice.



What if he is the victim, of a false allegation?

This listen and believe mantra would have more merit if high profile rape cases didn't most frequently go against the accuser. When there is an allegation it is just that, an allegation until the evidence can be judged by court.

...

I do not condone victim blaming, I hope Daw is not guilty, but I hope he didn't do it more than I hope he is found not guilty. ....
Excellent, thoughtful post. You must be on the wrong board? :)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hawthorn player according to herald sun twitter
Nobody should be told who they are until it is proven they are guilty, if it turned out to be someone looking for their 15 mins of fame, she could ruin their lives. Let the Police investigate and determine the facts before we judge.
 
If you check Twitter, there are posts about it. You just have to search some pretty obvious keywords and then look at all tweets. Not sure if the two names are real or not, but that's what's being said. But to be honest, I'd rather wait until anything has been properly confirmed. Because if the two aren't guilty, then the court of "public opinion" completely f*cks them.
 
Abasi (and other moderators) how long til this flog gets banned? Enough is enough surely?
This is not a board I moderate. Report the posts you find offensive and they will be dealt with.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Would they know this if they waved the taxi down on the street and paid cash?
The trip went to a house with an address.

The players involved better hope they have more than the 'paid cash' defence they learned from Law & Order reruns.
 
I honestly can't believe they give any details until there is a case.
Robo reckons that because we know it's hawthorn players they are all being tarnished, but if a victim isn't prepared to put their own name to the allegations then they shouldn't be allowed to release any details of the offenders.

Obviously if they are guilty throw the book at them.
 
This is not a board I moderate. Report the posts you find offensive and they will be dealt with.
Indeed.

People, there is no point tagging moderators you are familiar with if you see a post that contravenes the rules. Report the post and wait for those that actually do mod the board to deal with it.
 
Perhaps I am misreading that, but if you are suggesting that a change in evidence is the reason charges weren't pursued back then and aren't now, that is most certainly not the case.

I'm not implying that, I am saying because the most recent evidence has changed it will likely be a significant point in terms of raising doubt about the evidence given. Beyond all reasonable doubt is required to get a conviction, if you had any doubt about the evidence then you would be obliged to return a not guilty verdict.

Daw is not required to prove his innocence, and is presumed to be innocent, it is up tot he prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt, that is a significant hurdle in a field where evidence is often lacking.

Not sure which jury system you are thinking of, but it is not the Australian one.

It is a far less involved a process in Victoria compared to the United States, but there is a lot involved in the selection process regardless, 12 jurors will be selected, they parade around and either side can exclude up to 6 people each, well resourced lawyers tend to have specialists at profiling people, there is a lot of information you can gleam from someone based on how they look, how they dress and their body language.

I would love to know how you think a better-resourced law firm is able to "ensure an impartial jury is selection", or the situations where "a lawyer appointed by the state" assists in jury selection, because neither fit with the system I've worked in for a decade.

Resources.

Australia doesn't devote enough resources to legal aid, most legal aid lawyers are over-worked and are paid to process cases, not to win them. I know someone who got a prison sentence for a relatively minor first offence despite the prosecutor, police and victim not deem it was appropriate thanks to the public processing system. If you want justice you have to pay for it.

You get what you pay for. The amount of resources that will be put towards a case tends to be based on how much you are willing to spend on your defense. You don't need to employ the biggest law firm, I am sure you could get a good defense from a smaller firm as long as they are experienced, have a good success rate and if they have and devote the resources to your case.

But, if you feel the jury selection process isn't important then I hope you do not get offended if I do not seek your service should I ever have the misfortune of needing a lawyer.
 
Last edited:
Where's there is smoke there is fire! Guilty or not guilty there will be some truth to it!

Agreed.

Although one part of my mind always thinks about the "what if". Say a player rejected a girl who was mentally unstable. Unstable enough to go as far as crying rape to punish him? What if you were that player?

I'm not victim bashing. It's a highly unlikely scenario, but I'm sure it's happened somewhere before in this crazy world. To be unfairly accused would be almost the same hell as being an actual victim IMO.

The human race is so flawed.
 
Did Mugiwara56 pursue the LOTO about an offence that was found to have not happened by the police? And now making unsubstantiated accusations about footy players he/she doesn't know? Sounds like this peanut belongs in an institution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top