Mega Thread JUDGMENT -Essendon/Hird v ASADA Trial: Investigation legal (club/ASADA/AFL/AFLPA/WADA statements)

[Laphroaig]

Do you have a problem with comprehension?

That is the whole gist of the last few pages of this thread, and, directly what I'm saying.

A positive test is not the only smoking gun.

ASADA would have the compounding chemist and the importer all lined up and ready to go.

Take the plank from thine own eye.

You talk about implication of a positive. Failure to be tested is not an implication of anything. It's a violation all of it's own.

The reason it's a violation is obvious to all. But cause and effect differ.

 

[thegerman]

Take the plank from thine own eye.

You talk about implication of a positive. Failure to be tested is not an implication of anything. It's a violation all of it's own.

The reason it's a violation is obvious to all. But cause and effect differ.

No sh1t Sherlock. That's what we have been discussing throughout the thread.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Peptides are not illegal either, they are banned.
Also, an athlete does not need to take anything to be punished. They do not even need to be thought to have taken anything to be suspended. Not following the process to ensure you are not taking stuff that is banned is enough.

Answer this, if an athlete not believed to have taken anything can be banned because he missed tests, how is it you think an athlete known to have taken something will not be banned because the evidence it is banned is, in your opinion, weak. They are required to be informed of what they have taken, they are required to have evidence that what they have taken is approved. An admission they took something, not entirely sure what, cant seem to find any documentation, is in itself punishable.

Right . None of it happened . They are still investigating, what I don't know. And 2 days ago I heard they were making up new show causes . To what?
You can splurt rules all day long . SOME TIME THE RULE MAKERS STUFF UP? All I'd like to see is transparency , I never gave a stuff who was guilty or who wasn't I just am curious to know the actual facts. 2 years and still none.

 

[JoondalupJ]

You do not seem to understand the process at all.
When enquiries are made about a drugs "legality" they are time stamped and recorded by ASADA or WADA. So you can't have the scenario you have suggested. I know an Essendon doctor claims that he was told AOD was permitted by ASADA. However this was not done by an enquiry through the correct channels BEFORE they used AOD. It was done after it had been used for over a year and not through the drug hotline.
As others have said, ASADA cannot entirely be blamed for taking such a long time. The main reason it took so long is that, without positive blood or urine samples, they had to piece together a complex paper trail. Of course Essendon had very little, if any, documentation which made their job almost impossible. Ultimately they did a good job despite this, because they came up with enough evidence to convince a former Federal court Judge that SCNs could be issued.
ASADA is probably waiting now for the season to finish before it proceeds with expecting a response from the players to the SCNs.

A complex paper trail hey?Wow well that'll certainly get the Perry Masons of the world on their toes. Too many different stories mate.
In fact I had read a long time ago (which isn't unusual in this s**t investigation) it was WADA who gave the opinion of this substance not being banned, so its all heresay, you ASADA and I say tomada oops WADA, and once again unprovable as your paper trail will probably prove.
Made the most of an situation where they had no blood or urine samples??? Yeah sure mate. You wouldn't want to be hanging someone on that hey?
But ASADA want to do some hanging? , Crikey reasonable doubt????? There is tons and tons of reasonable doubt.
The Judge simply agreed that ASADA and the AFL had a right to proceed , he said nothing about guilt or innocence.
Thats where it lies.
The law is a complicated load of s**t , where these things are concerned. Innocent peoppe will get a bullet because of this crap.
Called a balls up search for a smoking gun.

If they find one and they all confess, then you'll have your hanging! I'll be there with my knitting.

 

[romeoh]

Right . None of it happened . They are still investigating, what I don't know. And 2 days ago I heard they were making up new show causes . To what?
You can splurt rules all day long . SOME TIME THE RULE MAKERS STUFF UP? All I'd like to see is transparency , I never gave a stuff who was guilty or who wasn't I just am curious to know the actual facts. 2 years and still none.

Surely this could have been over long ago if Essendon had produced the records?

 

[IanW]

Surely this could have been over long ago if Essendon had produced the records?

And when we say "records", we mean not-forged and not made up after the fact records.

 

[ChrisKaias]

Sorry, Chris, but the statement you have made is wrong. ASADA do not "need evidence a violation occurred".

All ASADA need to do (via the Show Cause Notice process) is raise the allegation of inappropriate conduct [ I've chosen this phrase to try to capture all of the various types of behaviour set out in the codes] - once the delegate has issued the SCN it is up to the regulated athlete to show (to their governing authority - in this case the AFL) that they did not take the actions that are alleged in the SCN.

As a passing observation to explain why the ASADA process is so drawn out, I note that ASADA, as with any Commonwealth regulatory agency, is subject to the Commonwealth DDA provisions for improper administrative action. As such, given the substantial payouts for unlawful administrative actions, and the substantial impact on individual public servants for issuing allegations withoutr proof, without supporting evidence (independently reviewed) ASADA don't issue SCNs.

Beyond the decision to issue the SCN, which includes the decision making process within ASADA that leads to the delegate's decision that there is sufficient evidence to support the allegations contained in the SCN, no "onus" is on ASADA - the provisions of strict liability on the athletes are quite clear (much as Hardie, B Schwab and others might protest about the fairness of this approach).

The players must prove, on the balance of probabilities, and using the evidentiary standards applicable to normal Commonwealth administrative processes, that they (the individual athlete) ingested no banned or unregulated substances, and that any allegations of (or evidence of) unapproved substances and/or potentially unlawful compounds have no basis, or are demonstrably wrong.

Most importantly, "Essendon" (or any other "club" in any code) have no role at all once SCNs are issued - unless the player defence is that the club brainwashed or grossly misled them.

The players (or more accurately the "regulated athletes") have the onus to prove that they have nothing to respond to. Hence the notion of Show Cause Notices - you, the player (not your club, doctor or agent) must show that you have no cause to answer.

It is up to ASADA if they attach any supporting evidence to any SCN issued to any athlete - there is no statutory requirement on them to do so, and if they don't provide any evidence, all it does is make it easier for the athlete to meet the onus of responding to the allegation.

The Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel decides, based on the allegations in SCNs and the responses from the players, whether or not it is possible that an anti-doping rule violation might have been committed - noting that this is far below even the civil standard of proving that something occurred.

Once the ADRVP have decided that a violation might have been committed, the ASADA penalty recommendations will be considered by the ADRVP - in the context of the statements made in the Show Cause Notices.

Again, ASADA does not have to "prove" to "the comfortable satisfaction of" anyone that "violations" or "doping offences" occurred. Indeed, apart from one passing reference in a single comment by one judicial review officer, the phrase "to the comfortable satisfaction of" has no meaning in any case law on any field of Commonwealth administrative or regulatory law. It is also not a phrase that has ever been recognised at State, local or statutory agency decision making.

Ultimately, the AFL are responsible for the action against the players registered with the AFL competitions, not ASADA - the AFL run the process of determining the penalty applicable to the athlete (through the AFL doping tribunal).

ASADA (and for that matter WADA) only have a role if they are dis-satisfied with the penalty that the regulating sports authority (in this case the AFL, in the case of Cronulla the NRL) have chosen to apply, or if they have concerns that the appropriate administrative processes have not been followed (see for example the WADA action against UCI on cycling's initial "investigation" process on Armstrong).

The ADVRP has a role as a forum for the players to respond to the Show Cause Notices, but it is not a forum that imposes obligations of proof (or prosecutorial burdens) on ASADA. Ultimately, the final penalty considerations (and the weight to give to any pleas in mitigation by individual players) are the responsibility of the AFL doping tribunal.

As with any other Commonwealth regulatory action, persons who feel aggrieved by the administrative processes can always try to seek judicial review of the process - but given the publicly available information in this case, Middelton's findings on process, and the damning findings of the Switkowski review that was commissioned by EFC, it is difficult to see how EFC or any individual player can claim that there is no evidence of any potentially unlawful or inappropriate behaviour. This is particularly the case when one considers the sheer volume of injections administered by the EFC.

By the way, given your prolific public tweeting on this case, and your apparent statements of certain knowledge on this case:

• do you have a law degree?
• have you ever practiced at any stage in sports law cases or in Commonwealth administrative law?
• how many cases have you appeared at the ADVRP in?
• apart from attending the public hearings of the (very limited scope) injunctory application by Hird and Essendon, what hearings have you attended on other doping allegations in other sports, and what interactions have you had with doping regulatory officials in other jurisdictions?

Again - ASADA do not need to "prove" "a violation occurred" - it is enough for ASADA to have reasonable suspicions that a breach may have occurred - it is then up to the players (NOT Essendon) to prove - to the balance of probabilities - that any alleged breach did not occur.

Essendon have no role at all in "leading evidence" or "reducing" anything - indeed Essendon aren't even a party recognised under the ADVRP! They would need special leave to even appear as a party to make submissions!

In response to your very aggressive and personal post:

When I referred to 'Essendon' have to show it was just shorthand for saying the player has to show...

The reason for the 'Show Cause Notice' process is because when you have the extra step of the ADRVP you need to allow someone to respond to the case put to them, to meet the requirements of the hearing rule. Ultimately it is still for ASADA to show that it is 'possible' that a violation has occurred (at the ADRVP stage) and that a violation did occur to the comfortable satisfaction of the tribunal. They can't randomly make an allegation with nothing to back it up.

Then when it gets to the tribunal stage it is indeed to the comfortable satisfaction of the tribunal, as stated in 15.1 of the Anti-Doping Code.

With regards to people mentioning Bannister - that is a separate offence (a whereabouts offence). He isn't charged with 'Use or Attempted Use' and unable to prove otherwise. In those cases, ASADA would have to prove he committed the whereabouts offence.

 

[compact72]

Quick question.

Under what clause can the support staff (Hird etc) get issued SCN and possible lead into infraction notices?

 

[blackshadow]

A complex paper trail hey?Wow well that'll certainly get the Perry Masons of the world on their toes. Too many different stories mate.
In fact I had read a long time ago (which isn't unusual in this s**t investigation) it was WADA who gave the opinion of this substance not being banned, so its all heresay, you ASADA and I say tomada oops WADA, and once again unprovable as your paper trail will probably prove.
Made the most of an situation where they had no blood or urine samples??? Yeah sure mate. You wouldn't want to be hanging someone on that hey?
But ASADA want to do some hanging? , Crikey reasonable doubt????? There is tons and tons of reasonable doubt.
The Judge simply agreed that ASADA and the AFL had a right to proceed , he said nothing about guilt or innocence.
Thats where it lies.
The law is a complicated load of s**t , where these things are concerned. Innocent peoppe will get a bullet because of this crap.
Called a balls up search for a smoking gun.

If they find one and they all confess, then you'll have your hanging! I'll be there with my knitting.

The more you post the more ignorance you reveal.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[SaintsSeptember]

A complex paper trail hey?Wow well that'll certainly get the Perry Masons of the world on their toes. Too many different stories mate.
In fact I had read a long time ago (which isn't unusual in this s**t investigation) it was WADA who gave the opinion of this substance not being banned, so its all heresay, you ASADA and I say tomada oops WADA, and once again unprovable as your paper trail will probably prove.
Made the most of an situation where they had no blood or urine samples??? Yeah sure mate. You wouldn't want to be hanging someone on that hey?
But ASADA want to do some hanging? , Crikey reasonable doubt????? There is tons and tons of reasonable doubt.
The Judge simply agreed that ASADA and the AFL had a right to proceed , he said nothing about guilt or innocence.
Thats where it lies.
The law is a complicated load of s**t , where these things are concerned. Innocent peoppe will get a bullet because of this crap.
Called a balls up search for a smoking gun.

If they find one and they all confess, then you'll have your hanging! I'll be there with my knitting.

Complex paper trails are fine, they are used all the time in business. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean its not solid.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Complex paper trails are fine, they are used all the time in business. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean its not solid.

And you.

 

[JoondalupJ]

The more you post the more ignorance you reveal.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

The first time I read this post from you I realised that ignorance is total inside you as well.

I have opinions. No charges yet .

If Essendon get done over fine. If they are guilty , but all you armchair lawyers are full of it. With your brilliant educated legal comments. Yeah sure.

Me. I have simply followed what has happened and no one is charged or proven guilty of anything. But there's been a few bullshit court cases which haven't led to anything either yet, so whose ignorant. Its not me.

So take a flying jump at yourself. I don't profess to be an expert , just someone that actually sees the trees and the forest.

Ignorance is exactly what you portray when you insult people it means you may just be a fool and don't know it.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The first time I read this post from you I realised that ignorance is total inside you as well.

I have opinions. No charges yet .

If Essendon get done over fine. If they are guilty , but all you armchair lawyers are full of it. With your brilliant educated legal comments. Yeah sure.

Me. I have simply followed what has happened and no one is charged or proven guilty of anything. But there's been a few bullshit court cases which haven't led to anything either yet, so whose ignorant. Its not me.

So take a flying jump at yourself. I don't profess to be an expert , just someone that actually sees the trees and the forest.

Ignorance is exactly what you portray when you insult people it means you may just be a fool and don't know it.

Essendon have already been punished by the AFL.
This was one of the things Essendon declared illegal and challenged in court. Essendon failed, the court case agreed that it was OK that the AFL had found Essendon guilty. GUILTY. Yes I have heard people state that it was "only" poor governance. I'm not sure why it rates an "only". Poor governance could be the reason there are no (Essendon FC ) records of what the players were injected with. In other companies poor governance can cause workplace accidents, or allow Embezzelment.
The ASADA process was stopped while the court case was in progress.
Now the ASADA process is moving again.

 

[compact72]

Under what clause allows Hird eligible for a scn?

 

[The_Wookie]

By the way, given your prolific public tweeting on this case, and your apparent statements of certain knowledge on this case:

• do you have a law degree?
• have you ever practiced at any stage in sports law cases or in Commonwealth administrative law?
• how many cases have you appeared at the ADVRP in?
• apart from attending the public hearings of the (very limited scope) injunctory application by Hird and Essendon, what hearings have you attended on other doping allegations in other sports, and what interactions have you had with doping regulatory officials in other jurisdictions?

This was entirely unnecessary, Chris's credentials and relevant information were known from day 1 by anyone that cared to notice. Nothing he says here should be considered legal advice by any means. Much the same as posts here by people working in any field should not be considered binding advice.

Given the way many people post here on the HTB, you should be asking the same questions of posters at least once or twice an hour. One might well ask the same questions of you given the line of questioning.

In any case, if people could focus on the case and the discussion of that rather than people, that would be great. Goes for everyone.

 

[jatz14]

Right . None of it happened . They are still investigating, what I don't know. And 2 days ago I heard they were making up new show causes . To what?
You can splurt rules all day long . SOME TIME THE RULE MAKERS STUFF UP? All I'd like to see is transparency , I never gave a stuff who was guilty or who wasn't I just am curious to know the actual facts. 2 years and still none.

The actual facts are the players concern. In the absence of facts, they are guilty. How is this difficult? A SCN says, we are suspicious of you, this is why, prove we are wrong. The entire process is designed so people cannot just make sure documentation does not exist, and then say, you have no proof so we are innocent. Despite repeated posts saying on here that there is no reversal of proof, effectively that is wrong. If you are given a SCN that shows a possibility of doping on your part, you need to show that this is wrong. You cannot rely on, 'the evidence I doped is not conclusive'.

 

[JoondalupJ]

The actual facts are the players concern. In the absence of facts, they are guilty. How is this difficult? A SCN says, we are suspicious of you, this is why, prove we are wrong. The entire process is designed so people cannot just make sure documentation does not exist, and then say, you have no proof so we are innocent. Despite repeated posts saying on here that there is no reversal of proof, effectively that is wrong. If you are given a SCN that shows a possibility of doping on your part, you need to show that this is wrong. You cannot rely on, 'the evidence I doped is not conclusive'.

That is rot. Innocent presumed is the law until guilt is proved . If we take this to the limit , any player who gets a show cause can say take me to court and prove it.
If any one has a suspicion about anything to anyone , your saying they can just say we think your guilty of something , prove your not.
That is rubbish.
I'm talking about a player or anyone for that matter defending themselves in civil court for anything , if they want to do that. That is the right of every citizen in this country.
ASADA have to prove absolutely any player they think is using drugs or banned substances , has used drugs or banned substances and under what circumstance to incriminate that person.
If that person says no I am not guilty , and if I was injected I thought it was all legal. It could have been vitamins.
What ever these trumped up organisations have, as set rules cannot condemn any body unless they have absolute proof.

How would you go about sentencing a person to life in prison when the law says to you , we don't know for sure, but we think you may have committed a murder.
Would the law not have to then charge the accused and take him to court and prove he/she is guilty. If this is not the case with ASADA who have laid nothing yet, that's provable , then they are a little private sports persecutor of the highest order.
When the truth comes out we can all see , I don't know Hird and Essendon might have been shooting heroin and ice day in day out or they might have been taking a legal sport supplement , no one has said it as a charge yet , why is everyone convicting anyone before the result.
Hird by the way took the fall and is back.Unfortunately because all the haters and head kickers have splattered the mud so widely with no actual perfect proof , that the man is ruined and Essendon look like having to move him because of what people may think , or worse just believe without any real evidence.

That is what has happened in this last 1 to 2 years. 1 to 2 years, its a long time,no nothing yet. If there is we will soon know.

 

[The_Wookie]

That is rot. Innocent presumed is the law until guilt is proved . If we take this to the limit , any player who gets a show cause can say take me to court and prove it.
If any one has a suspicion about anything to anyone , your saying they can just say we think your guilty of something , prove your not.
That is rubbish.
I'm talking about a player or anyone for that matter defending themselves in civil court for anything , if they want to do that. That is the right of every citizen in this country.
ASADA have to prove absolutely any player they think is using drugs or banned substances , has used drugs or banned substances and under what circumstance to incriminate that person.
If that person says no I am not guilty , and if I was injected I thought it was all legal. It could have been vitamins.
What ever these trumped up organisations have, as set rules cannot condemn any body unless they have absolute proof.

How would you go about sentencing a person to life in prison when the law says to you , we don't know for sure, but we think you may have committed a murder.
Would the law not have to then charge the accused and take him to court and prove he/she is guilty. If this is not the case with ASADA who have laid nothing yet, that's provable , then they are a little private sports persecutor of the highest order.
When the truth comes out we can all see , I don't know Hird and Essendon might have been shooting heroin and ice day in day out or they might have been taking a legal sport supplement , no one has said it as a charge yet , why is everyone convicting anyone before the result.
Hird by the way took the fall and is back.Unfortunately because all the haters and head kickers have splattered the mud so widely with no actual perfect proof , that the man is ruined and Essendon look like having to move him because of what people may think , or worse just believe without any real evidence.

That is what has happened in this last 1 to 2 years. 1 to 2 years, its a long time,no nothing yet. If there is we will soon know.

this isnt how the ASADA and ADRVP works. The Anti drug regimes are set up slightly different to courts of law.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

That is rot. Innocent presumed is the law until guilt is proved . If we take this to the limit , any player who gets a show cause can say take me to court and prove it.
If any one has a suspicion about anything to anyone , your saying they can just say we think your guilty of something , prove your not.
That is rubbish.
I'm talking about a player or anyone for that matter defending themselves in civil court for anything , if they want to do that. That is the right of every citizen in this country.
ASADA have to prove absolutely any player they think is using drugs or banned substances , has used drugs or banned substances and under what circumstance to incriminate that person.
If that person says no I am not guilty , and if I was injected I thought it was all legal. It could have been vitamins.
What ever these trumped up organisations have, as set rules cannot condemn any body unless they have absolute proof.

How would you go about sentencing a person to life in prison when the law says to you , we don't know for sure, but we think you may have committed a murder.
Would the law not have to then charge the accused and take him to court and prove he/she is guilty. If this is not the case with ASADA who have laid nothing yet, that's provable , then they are a little private sports persecutor of the highest order.
When the truth comes out we can all see , I don't know Hird and Essendon might have been shooting heroin and ice day in day out or they might have been taking a legal sport supplement , no one has said it as a charge yet , why is everyone convicting anyone before the result.
Hird by the way took the fall and is back.Unfortunately because all the haters and head kickers have splattered the mud so widely with no actual perfect proof , that the man is ruined and Essendon look like having to move him because of what people may think , or worse just believe without any real evidence.

That is what has happened in this last 1 to 2 years. 1 to 2 years, its a long time,no nothing yet. If there is we will soon know.

Don't compare it to normal law and murder etc. Its not operating in that framework.
Intent doesn't come into it. It was designed to keep illegal performance enhancements out of sport. None of the east german athletes knew what they were being given either. Nevertheless the system is designed to get them out. Fairness isn't relevant.

 

[Argy]

That is rot. Innocent presumed is the law until guilt is proved . If we take this to the limit , any player who gets a show cause can say take me to court and prove it.
If any one has a suspicion about anything to anyone , your saying they can just say we think your guilty of something , prove your not.
That is rubbish.
I'm talking about a player or anyone for that matter defending themselves in civil court for anything , if they want to do that. That is the right of every citizen in this country.
ASADA have to prove absolutely any player they think is using drugs or banned substances , has used drugs or banned substances and under what circumstance to incriminate that person.
If that person says no I am not guilty , and if I was injected I thought it was all legal. It could have been vitamins.
What ever these trumped up organisations have, as set rules cannot condemn any body unless they have absolute proof.

How would you go about sentencing a person to life in prison when the law says to you , we don't know for sure, but we think you may have committed a murder.
Would the law not have to then charge the accused and take him to court and prove he/she is guilty. If this is not the case with ASADA who have laid nothing yet, that's provable , then they are a little private sports persecutor of the highest order.
When the truth comes out we can all see , I don't know Hird and Essendon might have been shooting heroin and ice day in day out or they might have been taking a legal sport supplement , no one has said it as a charge yet , why is everyone convicting anyone before the result.
Hird by the way took the fall and is back.Unfortunately because all the haters and head kickers have splattered the mud so widely with no actual perfect proof , that the man is ruined and Essendon look like having to move him because of what people may think , or worse just believe without any real evidence.

That is what has happened in this last 1 to 2 years. 1 to 2 years, its a long time,no nothing yet. If there is we will soon know.

You don't know what you are talking about. Go read the WADA code and the acts that have been passed by the Australian government regarding anti-doping.

 

[BlueWorld]

ASADA have to prove absolutely any player they think is using drugs or banned substances , has used drugs or banned substances and under what circumstance to incriminate that person.
If that person says no I am not guilty , and if I was injected I thought it was all legal. It could have been vitamins.
What ever these trumped up organisations have, as set rules cannot condemn any body unless they have absolute proof.

No they don't. The standards of proof are a lot lower- comfortable satisfaction is all that is required.

 

[JoondalupJ]

No they don't. The standards of proof are a lot lower- comfortable satisfaction is all that is required.

Comfortable satisfaction hey? Well that's what I'm saying these so called organisations with powers can just go off on a whim and ask anyone to show cause,
because they have a lower standard of proof to guide them. Hell I hope they never have to try me, I'd be hung at dawn.

 

[JoondalupJ]

You don't know what you are talking about. Go read the WADA code and the acts that have been passed by the Australian government regarding anti-doping.

WADA codes and acts , they have a lower standard of proof too. Your just going too far , nothing has been proved has it? Tell me what you know ? Because I don't know if any ones been accused , just asked to show cause why they shouldn't be charged , with what exactly , taking drugs, taking sport supplements ? taking peptides banned or non banned? and offered a penalty in the off season , what kind of a joke are you talking about.

C'mon I know you want to hang some Bombers out , but you just can't without proof.

Now if there is some proof you'll hear soon enough, but come on tell me what they are going to be charged with, and who is going to prove it.

Come on Mr D Tracy?

 

[JoondalupJ]

Don't compare it to normal law and murder etc. Its not operating in that framework.
Intent doesn't come into it. It was designed to keep illegal performance enhancements out of sport. None of the east german athletes knew what they were being given either. Nevertheless the system is designed to get them out. Fairness isn't relevant.

Oh yeah , fairness is very relevant!

 

[JoondalupJ]

Essendon have already been punished by the AFL.
This was one of the things Essendon declared illegal and challenged in court. Essendon failed, the court case agreed that it was OK that the AFL had found Essendon guilty. GUILTY. Yes I have heard people state that it was "only" poor governance. I'm not sure why it rates an "only". Poor governance could be the reason there are no (Essendon FC ) records of what the players were injected with. In other companies poor governance can cause workplace accidents, or allow Embezzelment.
The ASADA process was stopped while the court case was in progress.
Now the ASADA process is moving again.

You've heard someone use the word guilty hey? Who? For what? Bringing the game into disrepute? s**t the AFL commision could be charged with that rubbish too.

ASADA was moving " again" well before the court case which said yes ASADA and the AFL could work in conjunction to investigate.

If ASADA were looking at it last year at the beginning of the year before the season and perhaps before the Xmas break and in early 2012 , because I don't know when these alleged crimes of sports doping and cheating were happening , or why they were happening or if anyone thought they were doing something illegal, either do you. Was it 2011 when this happened .

Poor governance, well maybe , but footy clubs are big places , strangely Essendon could not play finals they paid some huge fine , Hird took a hit for the club and was its scape goat , but I haven't heard about any drug charges or knowledge of such, I think we all know Hird took the fall.
I think we all know Dimetriou may have warned Essendon that they may be doing something that is wrong with their sport supplement program.

WE DON'T KNOW!

Do you think missing finals , paying huge fines and your senior coach getting rubbed out for a year is too small a punishment , when we really don't know for what.

And now ASADA want to screw up 30 odd young men by branding them cheats, what's with you people , whats the rap judge?