 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Member 7167 
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| David wrote: | This does complicate matters somewhat. What happens if a player pleads innocent in court after an internal club investigation has presumably already found him 'guilty'? Could this potentially prejudice a jury? And if he wins his case, does his internal penalty get revoked? If he's found guilty and given, say, a 1 month prison sentence, does the club levy a second penalty?
As everyone should have learned after the Lovett case, the whole concept of clubs or the AFL laying down punishments for off-field indiscretions — even a relatively sensible, measured response like Collingwood's in this case — really opens up a huge can of worms. |
_________________
Now Retired - Every Day Is A Saturday |
|
|
|
 |
MOTR
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Member 7167 wrote: | | David wrote: | This does complicate matters somewhat. What happens if a player pleads innocent in court after an internal club investigation has presumably already found him 'guilty'? Could this potentially prejudice a jury? And if he wins his case, does his internal penalty get revoked? If he's found guilty and given, say, a 1 month prison sentence, does the club levy a second penalty?
As everyone should have learned after the Lovett case, the whole concept of clubs or the AFL laying down punishments for off-field indiscretions — even a relatively sensible, measured response like Collingwood's in this case — really opens up a huge can of worms. |
The Lovett case was very different. St Kilda were in a no win situation as he had alienated the rest of the player group before he had even developed a relationship with them or the club.
He may not have been found guilty due to the evidence aspect required by our legal system but it is certain that many of the St Kilda playing group found his actions very questionable. The situation was untenable. Also, take into account that this is the same club that forgave two other players that had had rape allegations made against them.As noted in the two previous post, Marley was penalised by the club as his conduct / actions were outside contracted guidelines that apply to all Collingwood players |
It's a useless exercise to draw parallels. They are called allegations for a very good reason.
_________________
Be Staunch, Be Proud, Be Collingwood |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree 
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Location: John Wren's tote
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MOTR wrote: | | Member 7167 wrote: | | David wrote: | This does complicate matters somewhat. What happens if a player pleads innocent in court after an internal club investigation has presumably already found him 'guilty'? Could this potentially prejudice a jury? And if he wins his case, does his internal penalty get revoked? If he's found guilty and given, say, a 1 month prison sentence, does the club levy a second penalty?
As everyone should have learned after the Lovett case, the whole concept of clubs or the AFL laying down punishments for off-field indiscretions — even a relatively sensible, measured response like Collingwood's in this case — really opens up a huge can of worms. |
The Lovett case was very different. St Kilda were in a no win situation as he had alienated the rest of the player group before he had even developed a relationship with them or the club.
He may not have been found guilty due to the evidence aspect required by our legal system but it is certain that many of the St Kilda playing group found his actions very questionable. The situation was untenable. Also, take into account that this is the same club that forgave two other players that had had rape allegations made against them.As noted in the two previous post, Marley was penalised by the club as his conduct / actions were outside contracted guidelines that apply to all Collingwood players |
It's a useless exercise to draw parallels. They are called allegations for a very good reason. |
Very True MOTR.
_________________
" Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Nearly wrote: | | The club may have just found him 'guilty' of being in a place at a time that he is not supposed to be under team rules. He could be guilty of that without breaking any law. |
Hmm, not sure about that. Obviously it's not against club rules to be out late at night drinking in December, and surely it'd be a bit off to be considered in breach of club rules merely for being the subject of a police investigation or court case regardless of outcome.
To me at least, the club-imposed suspension seems to pretty clearly imply that he's done something 'wrong'. I expect a prosecutor might ask at one point, "If you're not guilty, why did you accept the club's internal sanction?". If nothing else, I hope he has a good answer prepared.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
delcorp
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Not because he was guilty of offence but because he should not have put himself in the situation |
|
|
|
|
Nick - Pie Man
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 'Because I didn't want to be delisted' might be a good response to that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
