I have heard that Lawyers for Hird have sought leave to have it heard at the High Court. WJ and Mr Leg can correct my very poor legal wording. Apparently it doesnt cost that much maybe $2000 plus legal fees another $3000. I believe it is up to the Hight Court whether they approve "leave". If approved then his legal fees go up massively. It could be heard within12 months. I dont understand how the High Court can accept the Hird camp's request given that the first Judge was so definite in his judgement and the last three were even more so. My source did say it was a stalling mechanism on the part of Hird and TH. To what end I am trying to fathom. Maybe as the cost is very limited in comparison to his current legal debts Hird could change his mind at any time. The more legal minded fraternity here could confirm if there are other costs if he decides not go ahead with the challenge.

If the High Court leave is rejected, I am confused as to whom or what authority will deal with Hird as the AFL/ASADA are dealing with the players. Is it possible that Hird gets away with his 12 month sojourn in France as his penalty and the players receive suspensions.

  On 31/01/2015 at 21:27, Whispering_Jack said:

Legal reasons (you might have noticed that some people involved in this saga will litigate at the drop of a hat).

The posts will be restored if verified.

Understand, though my understanding is that the original on BF was deleted because it could be connected to someone involved, perhaps through the poster.

But my question was in regards to who that was, over on BF, who posted the original ... but no matter.

  On 01/02/2015 at 02:10, M_9 said:

Geez bing, given that you re-posted here it seems an odd question to ask!

I copied from the repost on another part of BF, so didn't see the original - which had already been taken down. Was just wondering who had posted the original, by way of forming an opinion on how genuine it might be, and understanding where it might have come from.

  On 01/02/2015 at 06:25, biggestred said:

Hahaha theres a guy on twitter who reckons whats happening to hird is like what happened to mandela

Now ive stopped laughing... wow.

Link please! I need to see this for myself.

https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=%23asada&src=typd

They obviously have the West's version of the Mandela story then. UmKhonto we Sizwe.

  On 01/02/2015 at 03:05, Dr John Dee said:

Can you find some other drum to beat? You're becoming more than extremely tedious.

Answer to the question: it doesn't; but it will sure apply to activities in 2012 that the EFC weren't aware of (currently screening in a Tribunal hearing near you).

Maybe you should go read some of the wit and wisdom of Donald Rumsfeld.

I tried to read that book but only got halfway through and gave up.

Does that make him or me a half wit?

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:37, Ethan Tremblay 140 said:

They obviously have the West's version of the Mandela story then. UmKhonto we Sizwe.

Pretty sure its a parody [censored] take. (The twitter account/post)

At least, i hope it is!

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:25, Pipefitter said:

Link please! I need to see this for myself.

Like Wobbo comparing it to Mabo.....

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:18, longsuffering said:

I have heard that Lawyers for Hird have sought leave to have it heard at the High Court. WJ and Mr Leg can correct my very poor legal wording. Apparently it doesnt cost that much maybe $2000 plus legal fees another $3000. I believe it is up to the Hight Court whether they approve "leave". If approved then his legal fees go up massively. It could be heard within12 months. I dont understand how the High Court can accept the Hird camp's request given that the first Judge was so definite in his judgement and the last three were even more so. My source did say it was a stalling mechanism on the part of Hird and TH. To what end I am trying to fathom. Maybe as the cost is very limited in comparison to his current legal debts Hird could change his mind at any time. The more legal minded fraternity here could confirm if there are other costs if he decides not go ahead with the challenge.

If the High Court leave is rejected, I am confused as to whom or what authority will deal with Hird as the AFL/ASADA are dealing with the players. Is it possible that Hird gets away with his 12 month sojourn in France as his penalty and the players receive suspensions.

I am no expert with the High Court, but it is correct that you pay a filing fee and then seek Special Leave from a single High Court Justice to have an Appeal heard. They reject most such Applications.

The High Court Appeal has nothing to do with Hird being punished.

If the players are suspended I think his position becomes absolutely untenable. The club can deal with that.

ASADA can also deal with the club and officials if more than 2 players are suspended for a team activity. ASADA would need to issue Notices against the Club and/ or Officials.

I would imagine that ASADA are awaiting the conclusion of the AFL tribunal before contemplating any further move.

Assuming that the worst happens (from the Essendon POV) and the players are all given harsh penalties, there is going to be massive fallout within the club. I would expect an extraordinary general meeting to be called to remove the club board, followed quickly by removal of the management structure employed by the club, that being the CEO's department, Coaching department and Medical team. Given that they are all facing a future of being virtually unemployable in sporting circles as well as law suits from the players for loss of income and any possibly future illness that can be attributed to the drug program, you can see why they are all taking this tack. It may seem that they are being willful, defiant or arrogant, but I think the reality is more that they know how ruinous it will be for them if things go badly for them. Maintaining this stance is their best hope of getting away with some chance of future financial stability.

If/when the players lose at the tribunal and are suspended for 18months etc they will appeal. Essendon will just claim its all bulldust and that the afl and asada are incompetent.

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:44, Redleg said:

I am no expert with the High Court, but it is correct that you pay a filing fee and then seek Special Leave from a single High Court Justice to have an Appeal heard. They reject most such Applications.

The High Court Appeal has nothing to do with Hird being punished.

If the players are suspended I think his position becomes absolutely untenable. The club can deal with that.

ASADA can also deal with the club and officials if more than 2 players are suspended for a team activity. ASADA would need to issue Notices against the Club and/ or Officials.

I would imagine that ASADA are awaiting the conclusion of the AFL tribunal before contemplating any further move.

I'm even less of an expert but I understood the fee was much high (closer to $100k) although I believe that included the probable cost of the lawyering to get the documents for requesting leave.

$5,000 would barely get these guys out of bed.

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:41, Deeman said:

I tried to read that book but only got halfway through and gave up.

Does that make him or me a half wit?

You mean the Princeton Uni graduate, who was considered smart enough to be Defence Secretary of the most powerful country on earth???

Easy answer mate.

Its you.

  On 01/02/2015 at 08:08, RalphiusMaximus said:

Assuming that the worst happens (from the Essendon POV) and the players are all given harsh penalties, there is going to be massive fallout within the club. I would expect an extraordinary general meeting to be called to remove the club board, followed quickly by removal of the management structure employed by the club, that being the CEO's department, Coaching department and Medical team. Given that they are all facing a future of being virtually unemployable in sporting circles as well as law suits from the players for loss of income and any possibly future illness that can be attributed to the drug program, you can see why they are all taking this tack. It may seem that they are being willful, defiant or arrogant, but I think the reality is more that they know how ruinous it will be for them if things go badly for them. Maintaining this stance is their best hope of getting away with some chance of future financial stability.

From what we have seen so far of Dons nutters they would build Hird a statue, sack everyone else and have him run the place on his own.

CEO, club doctor, coach, boot studder the whole ball of yarn.

Are Asada holding back a SCN notice to Hird until the tribunal is resoloved or Hirds high court challenge is resoloved?

Hardy could have nothing to worry about it looks liked joker is on some sort of performance enhancing stuff

  On 01/02/2015 at 07:18, longsuffering said:

I have heard that Lawyers for Hird have sought leave to have it heard at the High Court. WJ and Mr Leg can correct my very poor legal wording. Apparently it doesnt cost that much maybe $2000 plus legal fees another $3000. I believe it is up to the High Court whether they approve "leave". If approved then his legal fees go up massively. It could be heard within12 months.

I haven't come close to the High Court for many years - it's not really in the nature of my current practice to end up there. However, the amount you're quoting sounds like the cost of filing an application but it's likely to cost big bucks to have the application prepared and IMO a case of lot's more $'s down the drain to go with the estimated $1½m incurred by all parties so far which Hird or whoever's paying won't ever get back.

I mentioned a couple of pages back the issues Hird and his advisors need to deal with in order to get leave to appeal. I think about one in three applications get to see the light of day in the High Court and, based on the judgments of four Federal Court judges, I think Hird's chances of overturning the judgment completely if he made it there are about one in twenty.

On that basis, his best option for success is to take whatever money he wanted to waste on litigation to the Casino, lob it all on red or black (how very appropriate) at the roulette wheel and hope for the best. His chances would be much better over there.

  On 01/02/2015 at 06:31, Qwerty30 said:

EFC will struggle to form a legally sound case to sack Hird given the complete lack of governance at the club in 2012 and the fact that this tribunal is about the players actions and not Hird.

I would have asked to borrow your copy of Rumsfeld's words but on second thoughts its clearly provided little enlightenment to your good self.

The point of the reference has obviously gone right over your head which, given your monomania is hardly surprising (as is your feeble effort at wit).

I'll just leave you not knowing what it is that you don't know whether you know or not.

Amongst the known knowns is, of course, that you haven't got a bloody clue what's in Hird's contract.

Dr John

I'm sure that Querty agrees that if it is proven that they did use or intend to use substances banned under the ASADA/WADA code then the players who sought to gain advantage over all other players in the game (which of course is why it was all being done in the first place) and all culpable administrative and coaching staff who participated in, or negligently allowed the continuance of, the illicit program should be banned for two years and life respectively.

I'm sure that's a fair summary of your position, isn't it Querty ?

  On 01/02/2015 at 13:17, Dr John Dee said:

I'll just leave you not knowing what it is that you don't know whether you know or not.

Bravo. Well done. Was there a chapter on irony as well?

  On 01/02/2015 at 13:49, Crompton said:

Dr John

I'm sure that Querty agrees that if it is proven that they did use or intend to use substances banned under the ASADA/WADA code then the players who sought to gain advantage over all other players in the game (which of course is why it was all being done in the first place) and all culpable administrative and coaching staff who participated in, or negligently allowed the continuance of, the illicit program should be banned for two years and life respectively.

I'm sure that's a fair summary of your position, isn't it Querty ?

Compton, regardless of the decision of the tribunal, all those with positions of responsibility in the EFC footy dept should have been banned from sport for good. That has not happened to date and I doubt that it will. And the culpability goes beyond just Hird. It's Thompson, Cameron and Dr Reid. In addition, any board member who was in place during 2012 should also go.

I don't think the tribunal position makes it any easier for EFC to exit Hird as the tribunal is about the players misdemeanours. The very fact that they have been put in this position that they face a tribunal is appalling.

Further I don't think the tribunal outcomes will make it any easier for EFC to sack Hird. His current contract allegedly expires in about 18 months. I wonder if they believe that seeing his contract to expiry will be easier and less financially imposing than sacking him now and triggering another burst of vexatious litigation by Hird.

  On 01/02/2015 at 20:45, Qwerty30 said:

Bravo. Well done. Was there a chapter on irony as well?

As with wit, you wouldn't know irony if you tripped over it.

  On 01/02/2015 at 13:49, Crompton said:

Dr John

I'm sure that Querty agrees that if it is proven that they did use or intend to use substances banned under the ASADA/WADA code then the players who sought to gain advantage over all other players in the game (which of course is why it was all being done in the first place) and all culpable administrative and coaching staff who participated in, or negligently allowed the continuance of, the illicit program should be banned for two years and life respectively.

I'm sure that's a fair summary of your position, isn't it Querty ?

Crompton, there's no point in trying to summarise or do anything else with Qwerty's position, like make sense of it. He isn't interested in anything other than establishing a branch of the James Hird fanclub on Demonland and picking fights with people about a contract that he, like the rest of us, knows nothing about.

And one of the possible conditions in that contract that he knows nothing about might well have to do with protections for the EFC if investigations ongoing at the time led to adverse findings against players in Hird's charge, the club or Hird himself. Qwerty seems to think Little is an idiot. He may be all sorts of things but I wouldn't be putting any money on that.

  On 01/02/2015 at 21:09, Dr John Dee said:

Crompton, there's no point in trying to summarise or do anything else with Qwerty's position, like make sense of it. He isn't interested in anything other than establishing a branch of the James Hird fanclub on Demonland and picking fights with people about a contract that he, like the rest of us, knows nothing about.

And one of the possible conditions in that contract that he knows nothing about might well have to do with protections for the EFC if investigations ongoing at the time led to adverse findings against players in Hird's charge, the club or Hird himself. Qwerty seems to think Little is an idiot. He may be all sorts of things but I wouldn't be putting any money on that.

Good luck trying to establish a support base for Hird on this forum. it's got the proverbial snowflakes chance and rightfully so.