Remove this Banner Ad

If not guilty doesn't mean innocent...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lissy said:
Just wondering. If a person dies of a heart attack seconds before you plunge a knife in there heart, can you get done for murder?
Click to expand...
Assuming that's what the evidence shows, no, IMHO. You can't murder a dead person. But I reckon you might be up for attempted murder! And in reality you'd want some damn good evidence.
 
GuzzLG said:
Especially the part where 'good day sir' is immediately followed with another reply to me.

I can see you're on another level of logic altogether.
Click to expand...
You're right. Your irrelevant and pedantic analysis of 0.1% of my post has more than answered the substance of the whole thing.

Good day sir.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

centurion said:
You can take your lesson to Essendon supporters and shove it. Traitor.
Click to expand...

LOL..and yet I am stress free, and having the best year so far and for the first time in years enjoying the football.
 
GuzzLG said:
If 50 appeals are necessary then that is what must be done for justice. This is how justice works.
Click to expand...
That is how justice would work in a mysterious system that contained 49 levels of appeal courts. Yes, totally.
 
Difference between cleared with no case to answer and not comfortably satisfied because of insufficient evidence due to a lack of records. Judge said it was possible many times the substance could be TB4 not enough to be comfortably satisfied under the circumstances.

Think it speaks for itself to the average person with the slightest bit of intelligence.

What might change at the CAS, besides a possible lowering of the bar of comfortable satisfaction, is the lack of records could well have a negative effect this time, not help get Essendon off due to insufficient evidence.
 
Jimthegreat said:
Difference between cleared with no case to answer and not comfortably satisfied because of insufficient evidence due to a lack of records. Judge said it was possible many times the substance could be TB4 not enough to be comfortably satisfied under the circumstances.

Think it speaks for itself to the average person with the slightest bit of intelligence.

What might change at the CAS, besides a possible lowering of the bar of comfortable satisfaction, is the lack of records could well have a negative effect this time, not help get Essendon off due to insufficient evidence.
Click to expand...
Agree. If CAS says guilty cause you lost your records or cause you don't need to be convinced to such a high standard then WADA will not have proven that the players were not innocent. You explained the point I made in the OP nicely.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

GuzzLG said:
Agree. If CAS says guilty cause you lost your records or cause you don't need to be convinced to such a high standard then WADA will not have proven that the players were not innocent. You explained the point I made in the OP nicely.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with the interesting logic. Never heard it put that way before. Unless certain parties talk then one will never know for certain either way.
 
Milanista28 said:
If I took a picture of Nathan Fyfe walking past a known gym that sell steroids I could start an investigation on the circumstantial view that he just left the gym after receiving his injection.

Welcome to the world of WADA...
Click to expand...

You can blame years of people cheating before you with dodgy excuses for the hard line.

Those cheats have made it hard for everyone.
 
Milanista28 said:
If I took a picture of Nathan Fyfe walking past a known gym that sell steroids I could start an investigation on the circumstantial view that he just left the gym after receiving his injection.

Welcome to the world of WADA...
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting the reason for ASADA investigating Essendon was as innocent as the equivalent of them 'walking past a gym that sells steroids'?


You can't be bring that naive can you?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lavender Bushranger said:
Are you suggesting the reason for ASADA investigating Essendon was as innocent as the equivalent of them 'walking past a gym that sells steroids'?


You can't be bring that naive can you?
Click to expand...

Nah...

But that's pretty strong circumstantial evidence, The sort of thing ASADA look for when they got jack shit.
 
carnthedons said:
No, it's about asking 3 other people whether they come to a different conclusion.
Click to expand...
Basically, as they believe the original conclusion to be flawed.

carnthedons said:
Finding the truth is emotive nonsense as it implies that either a) what has been found is not the truth or b) 3 eminent legal professionals went against their entire professional legacy and found the convenient truth.
Click to expand...
The AFL tribunal categorically ruled out that the drugs could have been thymomodulin or thymo alpha....basically saying that the Essendon players defence was rubbish.

The AFL tribunal then stated they couldn't be comfortably satisfied that the TB4 that Charters ordered from the Chinese supplier was actually TB4...and hence the players got off. The AFL tribunal wasn't going to prosecute based on a circumstantial case.

WADA obviously think that the circumstantial case is strong enough and have gone again to get it the case heard by parties who have no vested interest in the protection of AFL.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

If not guilty doesn't mean innocent...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top