Play Nice Still no evidence against Melbourne re: tanking

Baldur

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Posts
17,345
Likes
11,139
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
St Kilda
Thre

Threatening people's jobs/futures is coercion. The AFL needs 'sufficient evidence', and it doesn't look like they have it otherwise charges wouldv'r been laid as in Adelaide's case.
Making sure somebody understands the consequences of their answers or failure to answer is called "natural justice" It is what Melbourne demanded.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Theo X

Premiership Player
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Posts
4,354
Likes
3,725
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
East Wedderburn Trugo Club
Making sure somebody understands the consequences of their answers or failure to answer is called "natural justice" It is what Melbourne demanded.
Using threats and intimidation is not part of natural justice. Turning official interview tapes off when threatening and intimidating interviewees is not part of natural justice.
 

rfctiger74

Premium Platinum
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
43,886
Likes
81,470
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Using threats and intimidation is not part of natural justice. Turning official interview tapes off when threatening and intimidating interviewees is not part of natural justice.
you think when cops interrogate a suspect they do it over a port and cigars? Cops threaten you with jail, getting raped in remand, losing your job/missus if you refuse to co-operate and tell them the truth. How is this any different to making these guys realize that if they lie and/or refuse to co-operate banishment from the AFL is the very likely consequence, and if they want to have any chance of an ongoing footy career they should speak the truth?

Some people have had a VERY sheltered life if they think interrogation is:

a: did you tank?

b: no

a: are you sure?

b: yes

a: fair enough then..........
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Posts
48,154
Likes
50,468
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Rotor Volgograd, The Exers
Using threats and intimidation is not part of natural justice. Turning official interview tapes off when threatening and intimidating interviewees is not part of natural justice.
One person's threats and intimidation is another person's blunt words.

To use the Melbourne line of defence in this thread - do you know threatening words or intimidatory behaviour occurred.

So how do you know if they were indeed threats or intimidation....
 

Theo X

Premiership Player
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Posts
4,354
Likes
3,725
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
East Wedderburn Trugo Club
you think when cops interrogate a suspect they do it over a port and cigars? Cops threaten you with jail, getting raped in remand, losing your job/missus if you refuse to co-operate and tell them the truth. How is this any different to making these guys realize that if they lie and/or refuse to co-operate banishment from the AFL is the very likely consequence, and if they want to have any chance of an ongoing footy career they should speak the truth?

Some people have had a VERY sheltered life if they think interrogation is:

a: did you tank?

b: no

a: are you sure?

b: yes

a: fair enough then..........
Sorry if i've never been arrested and don't watch rubbish TV shows
 

Theo X

Premiership Player
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Posts
4,354
Likes
3,725
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
East Wedderburn Trugo Club
One person's threats and intimidation is another person's blunt words.

To use the Melbourne line of defence in this thread - do you know threatening words or intimidatory behaviour occurred.

So how do you know if they were indeed threats or intimidation....
They're coming from the same sources that people like you are claiming as proof of tanking.
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Posts
26,409
Likes
33,673
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
Using threats and intimidation is not part of natural justice. Turning official interview tapes off when threatening and intimidating interviewees is not part of natural justice.
Not really.

Natural justice is akin to being given 'a fair go'. It does not necessarily preclude threats of de-registration by an interrogator or the things you mentioned. It means that Melbourne has the right to air their side of the case and to know of and defend against (if they so choose) accusations levelled at them by the AFL.

Again, some Melbourne fans are conflating issues.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Baldur

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Posts
17,345
Likes
11,139
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
St Kilda
Using threats and intimidation is not part of natural justice. Turning official interview tapes off when threatening and intimidating interviewees is not part of natural justice.
Neitheir is prima facie a breach of natural justice. But that being said it is a matter of proportion & content.

Turning tapes off so a person can discuss the possable conseqences of a certain answer without being held to have given that answer is fine. Turning a tape off so you can threaten them with illegal conseqences is not ok.

Advising a person that a certain answer would be an admission of guilt and the possable punishment, but also reminding them that lying can also be punished is not only not a breach of natural justice but a part of the requirements of natural justice.

The truth is neitheir of us know what happened in that interview room. The newspaper will sensualise the report.
 

Bluelegs

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Posts
20,273
Likes
32,847
Location
Robbo's sleeve
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Axiom, Greenbay Packers
you think when cops interrogate a suspect they do it over a port and cigars? Cops threaten you with jail, getting raped in remand, losing your job/missus if you refuse to co-operate and tell them the truth. How is this any different to making these guys realize that if they lie and/or refuse to co-operate banishment from the AFL is the very likely consequence, and if they want to have any chance of an ongoing footy career they should speak the truth?

Some people have had a VERY sheltered life if they think interrogation is:

a: did you tank?

b: no

a: are you sure?

b: yes

a: fair enough then..........
Threatening witnesses into give false evidence however is not the same

Arthur Dexter Bradley testified against Rubin Carter after being threatened with jail.

People lie to cover their own arses. The thing is we don't actually know much about the investigation and the details of the accusation from Melbourne regarding intimidation tactics were very vague. Sure it could be nothing. But if the investigation is being handled to get false testimonials out of witnesses then that is compromised.
 

Bully187

Senior List
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Posts
157
Likes
6
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
The AFL already have their results of the investigation they are just conveniently pushing it out so that Melbourne can still have their wonder draft this year and won't be sanctioned making them shit for another decade. Unfair to the rest of the comp yeah because if were anyone else the investigation would of been done and dusted by now. That being said, I actually don't mind it because I'm sick of putting up with Melbourne just being so shit for so long, they are a blight on the competition.
What's the bet they will make their sanctions for the next draft or two, which really won't be of that much relevance anyway after this yr they will of have a truckload of young talent come into the club (which they will probably stuff up too actually).
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Posts
26,409
Likes
33,673
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
Yes I agree in that threatening potential witnesses would compromise the integrity of an investigation. However, there can be a fine line between reminders about the consequences of not being co-operative, and possibly unethical or even illegal threats.

I'm sure if the investigators were being unreasonable in their actions that Melbourne would leap onto it. As it stands, like many other Caro articles, it's mere unsubstantiated fluff at the moment. We only know for certain that there is an AFL investigation into alleged tanking by Melbourne in 2009. That's it.
 

rfctiger74

Premium Platinum
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
43,886
Likes
81,470
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Threatening witnesses to give false evidence however is not the same

Arthur Dexter Bradley testified against Rubin Carter after being threatened with jail.

People lie to cover their own arses. The thing is we don't actually know much about the investigation and the details of the accusation from Melbourne regarding intimidation tactics were very vague. Sure it could be nothing. But if the investigation is being handled to get false testimonials out of witnesses then that is compromised.
where has it been said they are being asked to give false evidence (I agree that is highly illegal)?

From the bits that have been said in the media, it sounds like they have convinced 1-2 to spill, and have then used that to break down the others (i.e. "we already know about the meeting, we know this was said, and we know you were there. you can either continue denying it, and say bye bye to your AFL career when this is done, or you can help us out and tell us your version").

Having a cop doing this, I'd be confident he knows the rules of interrogation well. 100% agree though if anyone is forced/induced to say something false, the book should be thrown at those who did it (days of cops working you over with phone books and fitting people up are supposed to be over, and there is definitely no place for it in AFL - its only footy FFS)
 

Sprout

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Posts
12,111
Likes
17,082
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
MCFC, The Exers
Cuz had a year off

WC had to undertake major changes that were so significant they cost two seasons - in responding to the charge. melistan is well and truely much further up disrepure creek

inreality it is a concept of the modern era so history is probably silent - unlike the squeelers inside melistan
Why do you keep referring to the club as "melistan"? This isn't the Bay, idiot.

How about providing an adult contribution to the discussion? It would be a refreshing change from most of what you've contributed thus far.
 

Theo X

Premiership Player
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Posts
4,354
Likes
3,725
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
East Wedderburn Trugo Club
The AFL already have their results of the investigation they are just conveniently pushing it out so that Melbourne can still have their wonder draft this year and won't be sanctioned making them shit for another decade. Unfair to the rest of the comp yeah because if were anyone else the investigation would of been done and dusted by now. That being said, I actually don't mind it because I'm sick of putting up with Melbourne just being so shit for so long, they are a blight on the competition.
What's the bet they will make their sanctions for the next draft or two, which really won't be of that much relevance anyway after this yr they will of have a truckload of young talent come into the club (which they will probably stuff up too actually).
You must be sick of losing to us all the time too then despite us being so unbelievably shit
 

ziad

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 2, 2009
Posts
14,095
Likes
6,576
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Yes I agree in that threatening potential witnesses would compromise the integrity of an investigation. However, there can be a fine line between reminders about the consequences of not being co-operative, and possibly unethical or even illegal threats.

I'm sure if the investigators were being unreasonable in their actions that Melbourne would leap onto it. As it stands, like many other Caro articles, it's mere unsubstantiated fluff at the moment. We only know for certain that there is an AFL investigation into alleged tanking by Melbourne in 2009. That's it.
if a condition of employment contract states that failute to coorperate etc will or can lead to de registration then restating it is justice in action, ensuring the spud knows their rights and responsibilities.

melistan can surely do better than this

(Melistan - the creative melding of the two most noted match fixing organisations known to this senior citizen). Suck it up princess
 

Sprout

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Posts
12,111
Likes
17,082
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
MCFC, The Exers
if a condition of employment contract states that failute to coorperate etc will or can lead to de registration then restating it is justice in action, ensuring the spud knows their rights and responsibilities.

melistan can surely do better than this

(Melistan - the creative melding of the two most noted match fixing organisations known to this senior citizen). Suck it up princess
Right, so you're a double threat: immature and incredibly stupid.

Only a complete idiot would not be able to discern the difference between reminding a witness of their rights and responsibilities, and coercion or actually threatening the witness. The reported allegation is that interview tapes were turned on and off - this is generally not practiced if what they are saying is all above board. Likewise I would not think it is customary in an AFL investigation to attempt to draw a confession by claiming that others had incriminated you. If these allegations are true then it is a case of using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. It destroys the integrity of the entire investigation.

Anyhow, you continue to use the term "melistan" cause it obviously makes you feel clever. I'll continue to assume you have nothing of value to add.
 

Bluelegs

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Posts
20,273
Likes
32,847
Location
Robbo's sleeve
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Axiom, Greenbay Packers
where has it been said they are being asked to give false evidence (I agree that is highly illegal)?

From the bits that have been said in the media, it sounds like they have convinced 1-2 to spill, and have then used that to break down the others (i.e. "we already know about the meeting, we know this was said, and we know you were there. you can either continue denying it, and say bye bye to your AFL career when this is done, or you can help us out and tell us your version").

Having a cop doing this, I'd be confident he knows the rules of interrogation well. 100% agree though if anyone is forced/induced to say something false, the book should be thrown at those who did it (days of cops working you over with phone books and fitting people up are supposed to be over, and there is definitely no place for it in AFL - its only footy FFS)
I never said that anyone was asked to give false evidence, the only thing that has been said is that Melbourne are upset with alleged threatening interrogations. I was just making a point about how these threats could be illegal or compromise the investigation. If the interrogators have just been doing the standard law and order grilling then it's hardly worth noting.
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Posts
26,409
Likes
33,673
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
The reported allegation is that interview tapes were turned on and off - this is generally not practiced if what they are saying is all above board. Likewise I would not think it is customary in an AFL investigation to attempt to draw a confession by claiming that others had incriminated you. If these allegations are true then it is a case of using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. It destroys the integrity of the entire investigation.
That's not exactly pointing to illegal conduct by the investigators. What if the interviewee wanted to say something 'off the record'?

Any questions of integrity would be answered later after any investigation findings. We're not exactly privy as to what's going on inside the investigation at the moment.
 

rfctiger74

Premium Platinum
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
43,886
Likes
81,470
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
I never said that anyone was asked to give false evidence, the only thing that has been said is that Melbourne are upset with alleged threatening interrogations. I was just making a point about how these threats could be illegal or compromise the investigation. If the interrogators have just been doing the standard law and order grilling then it's hardly worth noting.
I reckon people were expecting the "interrogation" AA previously gave Bailey and Ratten - soft as shit and a 5 minute phone call. Suspect people are surprised just how serious this hire is, and that he is actually prepared to dig to get the truth. Wouldn't be surprised if this increased aggression would shock/surprise any of the clubs, its definitely evidence the AFL is getting more hardcore with its investigations.
 

Sprout

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Posts
12,111
Likes
17,082
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
MCFC, The Exers
That's not exactly pointing to illegal conduct by the investigators. What if the interviewee wanted to say something 'off the record'?

Any questions of integrity would be answered later after any investigation findings. We're not exactly privy as to what's going on inside the investigation at the moment.
No we're not, but specifically the allegation (and I am going on Caro's report so to avoid sounding hypocritical I am taking it with a grain of salt) is that the interview tapes were turned off while threats were made regarding being thrown out of the industry and the like, if they did not confess.

IF the allegations are true, it is damning. You've conceded that previously FP.
 
Top Bottom