QS
Brownlow Medallist
Wouldn't have added anything to our case.Why Oliver isn't called to give direct evidence is beyond me though.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Wouldn't have added anything to our case.Why Oliver isn't called to give direct evidence is beyond me though.
Ahuh...Goodwin declined to comment on the Tribunal's decision but said 19-year-old Oliver was not a dishonest person.
"One thing I do know about Clayton is he's a tough customer and he doesn't lie," Goodwin said.
"He clearly felt some force."
"One thing I do know about Clayton is he's a tough customer and he doesn't lie," Goodwin said.
"He clearly felt some force."
Maybe. We could have directly asked him about his previous comments that he fell over in shock or whatever the pathetic nature of it was - "The wind blew me over" - rather than solely rely on the medical report that said he had a sore jaw. But you are probably right, it doesn't really add much but it would have been good to see him attacked directly and have him explain his actions.Wouldn't have added anything to our case.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The defence was arguing that there was no, or at worst only slight contact. Why would they call Oliver as a witness when all he is going to say is yeah he hit me hard - no need to rebut what isn't said when you've got vision that supports the argument there was little or no forceMaybe. We could have directly asked him about his previous comments that he fell over in shock or whatever the pathetic nature of it was - "The wind blew me over" - rather than solely rely on the medical report that said he had a sore jaw. But you are probably right, it doesn't really add much but it would have been good to see him attacked directly and have him explain his actions.
Keyser Soze QCThe defence was arguing that there was no, or at worst only slight contact. Why would they call Oliver as a witness when all he is going to say is yeah he hit me hard - no need to rebut what isn't said when you've got vision that supports the argument there was little or no force
It was more for the theater of making him look like a tosser given his other comments, not for the benefit of the case...The defence was arguing that there was no, or at worst only slight contact. Why would they call Oliver as a witness when all he is going to say is yeah he hit me hard - no need to rebut what isn't said when you've got vision that supports the argument there was little or no force
We'll probably be drawn to play them in the NT
Just listened to Schoey's thoughts on this on Backchat... far more professional than how MFC approached it and in particular, Oliver.
That approach is inherent in the RDP...If you thought that podcast dealt with the matter professionally you should listen to ours when it comes out tomorrow.
(Because it'll do the exact opposite)
Was wanting a Schoey rant but understandable that he didntJust listened to Schoey's thoughts on this on Backchat... far more professional than how MFC approached it and in particular, Oliver.
nothing came up. Now I have a stiffy.
Sorry for the delayed reply as i was tied up with something for the last 55mins.So confusing. Did it or didn't it? This is the no doz and viagra mix up all over again
Eh, wouldn't kill us to have someone offer something for once.Just listened to Schoey's thoughts on this on Backchat... far more professional than how MFC approached it and in particular, Oliver.
