Dustin Martin - total [censored]

[John Crow Batty 8,861]

30 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Trouble is you relate this story as if it equates to the Martin situation, when it most likely has nothing to do with it in terms of similarity. There's no indication that the woman in Martin's case was at all 'smug' and it's reprehensible to imply it.

As for the woman approaching Martin, why isn't her business if she was affected by the behaviour and thought it loud and obnoxious? Good on her for not being backward in coming forward. Maybe the restaurant hadn't done anything. Maybe the staff were also intimidated by Martin's behaviour. Maybe most of the staff were women.

Either the restaurant (or previous places) had been serving too many drinks to Martin, or his friends had been ignoring his drinking (or worse, buying him drinks). One is a failure of RSA, the other is mates not caring and not "looking after their mate". 

Well that incident I referred to was reported in the newspaper the following day.  All about a big bad biker going on a rampage in McDonalds and assaulted woman patron and her partner. Nothing  like what really happened and completely ignored the precursor  behaviour. That guy was disabled and Martin was intoxicated.  Just asking for trouble when tackling irrational behaviour without using common sense. It's just my opinion but I would not be surprised if there was some female power tripping going on in an environment where she thought was safe to get away with it.

Edited December 9, 2015 by america de cali

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

24 minutes ago, stuie said:

And neither is yours.

You keep getting yourself caught out and this is your reply. I never suggested mine was, you keep using referring to your life and your experiences, I was simply pointing out every situation is different.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

23 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

 

First paragraph second sentence....

Still waiting Stu.

[jnrmac 20,055]

18 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Trouble is you relate this story as if it equates to the Martin situation, when it most likely has nothing to do with it in terms of similarity. There's no indication that the woman in Martin's case was at all 'smug' and it's reprehensible to imply it.

As for the woman approaching Martin, why isn't her business if she was affected by the behaviour and thought it loud and obnoxious? Good on her for not being backward in coming forward. Maybe the restaurant hadn't done anything. Maybe the staff were also intimidated by Martin's behaviour. Maybe most of the staff were women.

Either the restaurant (or previous places) had been serving too many drinks to Martin, or his friends had been ignoring his drinking (or worse, buying him drinks). One is a failure of RSA, the other is mates not caring and not "looking after their mate". 

And here is the problem. With respect i think you are the one making assumptions about so much of this. This stuff then gets added to and before you know it  the real story gets lost. We perhaps should wait for the full story to come out (although the club and the AFL seem to be taking their sweet time about it).

You say there is no evidence the woman was 'smug'. In an earlier post by Song he details what he was told by the owners of the restaurant. Maybe your statement isn't right. I have seen on numerous occasions people go up to high profile people and impose on them unreasonably. Not saying its the case here but it happens a lot.

You also go on to say that the restaurant had served too many drinks to martin. You have no idea what they served him. He apparently had been at Stereosonic all day and there is a lot of stuff on offer there. You also don't know what his mate did or did not do.

It's easy to be holier than thou and on the face of it it is an appalling act regardless of any of those circumstances. But perhaps we should wait to hear both sides of the 'story'. 

 

[H_T 3,043]

5 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

As for the woman approaching Martin, why isn't her business if she was affected by the behaviour and thought it loud and obnoxious? Good on her for not being backward in coming forward. Maybe the restaurant hadn't done anything. Maybe the staff were also intimidated by Martin's behaviour. Maybe most of the staff were women.

Either the restaurant (or previous places) had been serving too many drinks to Martin, or his friends had been ignoring his drinking (or worse, buying him drinks). One is a failure of RSA, the other is mates not caring and not "looking after their mate". 

These are all reasonable points mauriesy. I thought good on Barrassi for intervening when he did on the street a few years back in StKilda.

But I also feared for his safety. No one knows what the outcome might be if you take matters into your own hands.

In both cases the results could have been far worse after confrontation.

 

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I have seen on numerous occasions people go up to high profile people and impose on them unreasonably. Not saying its the case here but it happens a lot.

But perhaps we should wait to hear both sides of the 'story'. 

This is true jnr. And in some cases vice versa with high profile people and complete strangers.

 

[stuie 7,374]

25 minutes ago, H_T said:

stuie, you don't do yourself any favours with responses like that. 

Can I ask, do you get my point (and others) about preventative measures? (Reminding you again that no one condones such behaviour as Martin's, nor stands for violence against women)

 

It's a simple question, that demands a simple answer. I'm confident you can give a straight answer, rather than splintering off on a tangent, quoting others posts.

What if Dustin in his intoxicated and unconcious state, actually inflicted more than pain on the victim after the threat? Resulting in something far, far more serious?

Would you in your wisdom just look at the result and consequence, or, would you also look at a preventative measure to prevent such confrontation and end result? 

 

In my opinion, to place any blame at all on the victim in this case is unfair. Is Dustin free of blame because of his "intoxicated" state? Do you think the woman that was assaulted at the Fremantle game should of just put up with the aggressive behaviour of the male involved, maybe even moved to a different section? Do we let that behaviour dictate how we live our lives, or should we be able to live our lives in peace and free from physical threats?

Have you seen the video from this incident? Dustin is standing over the women sitting at her dinner table, does that sound like she was unfairly instigating an innocent person?

There needs to be no caveats for this type of behaviour, it was wrong, end of story. No excuses because he was drunk, or because the woman told him off. None.

[stuie 7,374]

33 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Trouble is you relate this story as if it equates to the Martin situation, when it most likely has nothing to do with it in terms of similarity. There's no indication that the woman in Martin's case was at all 'smug' and it's reprehensible to imply it.

As for the woman approaching Martin, why isn't her business if she was affected by the behaviour and thought it loud and obnoxious? Good on her for not being backward in coming forward. Maybe the restaurant hadn't done anything. Maybe the staff were also intimidated by Martin's behaviour. Maybe most of the staff were women.

Either the restaurant (or previous places) had been serving too many drinks to Martin, or his friends had been ignoring his drinking (or worse, buying him drinks). One is a failure of RSA, the other is mates not caring and not "looking after their mate". 

he went to the restaurant straight from "Stereosonic", so pretty easy to draw conclusions from that.

[mauriesy 7,261]

8 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

And here is the problem. With respect i think you are the one making assumptions about so much of this. This stuff then gets added to and before you know it  the real story gets lost. We perhaps should wait for the full story to come out (although the club and the AFL seem to be taking their sweet time about it).

You say there is no evidence the woman was 'smug'. In an earlier post by Song he details what he was told by the owners of the restaurant. Maybe your statement isn't right. I have seen on numerous occasions people go up to high profile people and impose on them unreasonably. Not saying its the case here but it happens a lot.

You also go on to say that the restaurant had served too many drinks to martin. You have no idea what they served him. He apparently had been at Stereosonic all day and there is a lot of stuff on offer there. You also don't know what his mate did or did not do.

It's easy to be holier than thou and on the face of it it is an appalling act regardless of any of those circumstances. But perhaps we should wait to hear both sides of the 'story'. 

 

I didn't say 'evidence', I said 'indication. I used 'maybe' three times to indicate there were plenty of different possible scenarios, non of them proven.

In the last paragraph I said 'either ...' and I said 'or previous places'.

You could stop attributing things to me I never said.

[stuie 7,374]

23 minutes ago, america de cali said:

Well that incident I referred to was reported in the newspaper the following day.  All about a big bad biker going on a rampage in McDonalds and assaulted woman patron and her partner. Nothing  like what really happened and completely ignored the precursor  behaviour. That guy was disabled and Martin was intoxicated.  Just asking for trouble when tackling irrational behaviour without using common sense. It's just my opinion but I would not be surprised if there was some female power tripping going on in an environment where she thought was safe to get away with it.

Wow. Just wow.

[stuie 7,374]

12 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

And here is the problem. With respect i think you are the one making assumptions about so much of this. This stuff then gets added to and before you know it  the real story gets lost. We perhaps should wait for the full story to come out (although the club and the AFL seem to be taking their sweet time about it).

You say there is no evidence the woman was 'smug'. In an earlier post by Song he details what he was told by the owners of the restaurant. Maybe your statement isn't right. I have seen on numerous occasions people go up to high profile people and impose on them unreasonably. Not saying its the case here but it happens a lot.

You also go on to say that the restaurant had served too many drinks to martin. You have no idea what they served him. He apparently had been at Stereosonic all day and there is a lot of stuff on offer there. You also don't know what his mate did or did not do.

It's easy to be holier than thou and on the face of it it is an appalling act regardless of any of those circumstances. But perhaps we should wait to hear both sides of the 'story'. 

 

Just listing off excuses for him now... So is it the drinks, the restaurant, the music festival or the woman who is to blame for him threatening her life? Cos obviously it's not his fault at all...

[H_T 3,043]

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

In my opinion, to place any blame at all on the victim in this case is unfair. Is Dustin free of blame because of his "intoxicated" state? Do you think the woman that was assaulted at the Fremantle game should of just put up with the aggressive behaviour of the male involved, maybe even moved to a different section? Do we let that behaviour dictate how we live our lives, or should we be able to live our lives in peace and free from physical threats?

Have you seen the video from this incident? Dustin is standing over the women sitting at her dinner table, does that sound like she was unfairly instigating an innocent person?

There needs to be no caveats for this type of behaviour, it was wrong, end of story. No excuses because he was drunk, or because the woman told him off. None.

• No Martin is not free of blame. No one is saying that.
• No the woman at Freo should not have put up with aggressive behaviour. No one is saying that.
• No we shouldn't let that behaviour dictate our lives. I haven't said that.
• No I haven't seen the video from this incident. 
• We all recognise it was wrong, and there are no excuses for his drunk state - no one denies that.

Here I have answered all your questions. Can you at least extend me the courtesy of answering my question? Be accountable.

[nutbean 8,838]

To me there is a lot of arguing around three separate issues that are inextricably linked

1/ violence in general

2/ violence against women in particular

3/ How to get a safe outcome from a potentially dangerous situation  - i.e. how do you deal with a drunk person ?

So I will treat them separately - I deplore violence and I deplore violence against women in particular. Whilst I am generalising and it may not be so in the Dustin Martin case but I have seen attitudes by men towards women that are not replicated towards other men. And lastly what is the safest method of dealing with these situations ? Call management ? Call the police ? Try and defuse yourself ? There is no one simple answer and with no insight to the situation with Dustin we will never know.

 

[mauriesy 7,261]

Ultimately it's Martin's responsibility. But there could have been some procedures in place that might have prevented it.

'Responsible Serving of Alcohol' is a farce if someone is allowed to keep drinking in any establishment when they are clearly drunk. That's what RSA is meant for.

[H_T 3,043]

Just now, mauriesy said:

Ultimately it's Martin's responsibility. But there could have been some procedures in place that might have prevented it.

'Responsible Serving of Alcohol' is a farce if someone is allowed to keep drinking in any establishment when they are clearly drunk. That's what RSA is meant for.

And your earlier point about mates looking after mates.

[stuie 7,374]

2 minutes ago, H_T said:

• No Martin is not free of blame. No one is saying that.
• No the woman at Freo should not have put up with aggressive behaviour. No one is saying that.
• No we shouldn't let that behaviour dictate our lives. I haven't said that.
• No I haven't seen the video from this incident. 
• We all recognise it was wrong, and there are no excuses for his drunk state - no one denies that.

Here I have answered all your questions. Can you at least extend me the courtesy of answering my question? Be accountable.

I answered your question. Just because it wasn't how you wanted me to doesn't mean it doesn't count.

My problem with all this is all the "but"s going on. Martin did the wrong thing, but... He shouldn't have done it, but... That comes across as victim blaming to me.

[stuie 7,374]

2 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Ultimately it's Martin's responsibility. But there could have been some procedures in place that might have prevented it.

'Responsible Serving of Alcohol' is a farce if someone is allowed to keep drinking in any establishment when they are clearly drunk. That's what RSA is meant for.

Someone mentioned earlier that they were told Martin is a part owner of the venue, that would make it pretty hard for the staff there, especially given he showed up there already intoxicated and clearly not in any condition to be reasonable.

[ManDee 7,124]

There is a lot of victim blaming going on here.

 

What justification is there to threaten to stab someone in the face with a chopstick?  NONE

To suggest she was ........lets say a [censored] or rude or smugly goading.  SO WHAT!

A real man would do one of the following,

1 Apologise

2 Leave

3 Smile and laugh it of.

A real man does not threaten to stab someone in the face with a chopstick. That is the act of an insecure bully.

 

[H_T 3,043]

1 minute ago, stuie said:

I answered your question. Just because it wasn't how you wanted me to doesn't mean it doesn't count.

[The Chazz 4,077]

6 minutes ago, stuie said:

Someone mentioned earlier that they were told Martin is a part owner of the venue, that would make it pretty hard for the staff there, especially given he showed up there already intoxicated and clearly not in any condition to be reasonable.

Stuie, do you have a link for the video footage?

[daisycutter 29,604]

1 hour ago, Bossdog said:

Many years ago Police would attend domestics......They would separate the two combatants....give them a good talking to and unless blood was flowing leave the adults to work it out.....There was no follow up.   These were how most domestics were handled.

Since then, Police are now obliged to take out an intervention order for all domestics attended weather assault related or not and as a result the reports have gone through the roof.   The courts have a special court room to settle all domestic violence and are still backed up for six months.    So if you had an argument with your wife and police attended they have to apply for an intervention order, even if you have made up with said wife and every thing is rosy again.

I don't have the solution to this problem nor do I condone violence.....It just explains why the issue is so much more in the public eye.

As for Police taking no action......Well, first you have a complainant or you case will not proceed.    Don't blame the Police ....Blame the legal system    

it certainly might be the practice and the instructions,bd, but i'm not sure it is the law

[stuie 7,374]

9 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

Stuie, do you have a link for the video footage?

https://youtu.be/N2b8J1WdEW8

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

https://youtu.be/N2b8J1WdEW8

That cleared it up for everyone. 

Why even bother posting that.

[daisycutter 29,604]

32 minutes ago, stuie said:

Someone mentioned earlier that they were told Martin is a part owner of the venue, that would make it pretty hard for the staff there, especially given he showed up there already intoxicated and clearly not in any condition to be reasonable.

given you like facts, stuie, do you have any evidence martin is a part owner of mr myagi restaurant/bar, other than one anonymous forum post which was second hand at best?

i did a bitter of googling and couldn't find any other references. if true you'd think the media would be all over it

[stuie 7,374]

17 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

That cleared it up for everyone. 

Why even bother posting that.

Feel free to post your insightful videos showing that it's all the woman's fault then.... Oh wait...

[nutbean 8,838]

Titus O'reilly has his say...

Some fun defences of Dustin Martin

Over the last few days we’ve heard some fun and creative defences of Dustin Martin threatening to kill a woman. Let’s look at these as like the incident, they’re hilarious!

“He’s unlucky, we wouldn’t even know about this if he wasn’t a footballer.’

Quite possibly true, although you could argue if he wasn’t a footballer and his work found out about this incident he’d be sacked.

I should mention that’s not me arguing that, I’ve spoken to employment lawyers and a head of HR for a major corporate and they all said that was the case.

He could also have been referred to police and been charged.

But it’s a fair point that if Dustin wasn’t a well known footballer this could have slipped away like so many violent episodes that go unreported. That really is just pointing out how prevalent and underreported violence against women is, it’s not a defence.

Really, all you’re pointing out is how spectacularly stupid he is.

“He wasn’t actually going to kill her.”

Considering he can’t remember what happened due to his consumption of alcohol not even he knows what he could have done so this is a pretty big assumption and therefore a poor defence.

“The guy was smashed and can’t even remember it happening”

Is that a defence all of a sudden? If it is then everyone would just say that, whether it was true or not.

If you are the type that drinks to the point you can’t remember anything and you threaten to kill people, you’re not arguing a defence, you’re arguing you’re a threat to society.

“We’ve all made mistakes. Don’t get on your high horse.”

We sure have all made mistakes. I bet very few of us have threatened a stranger in a restaurant with a chopstick, while telling them you’ll kill them and hitting the wall behind them though.

That’s not a ‘mistake’ it’s assault.

“She works for Channel Seven and wanted a story.”

Yeah, this woman went out that night just trying to bump into a crazed, alcohol-fuelled footballer and get them to threaten to kill her.

Women are so manipulative and they play such a long game! She then appeared on TV not showing her face and not revealing her name. What a publicity seeking trouble maker!

Let’s side with the person threatening to kill people though.

“People are overreacting.”

Yeah, that’s what people have been doing about violence against women for so long, overreacting.

I long for the day were our problem is overreacting to this scourge. We are so far from overreacting to violence against women you’d need NASA’s New Horizons probe to get there from where we are.

Even 12 months suspended is therefore not enough for me. You threaten to kill someone you’re out of the game, this isn’t some borderline case.

“Hodge only got two weeks, other players got this and that.”

Personally, I think you’re on really shaky ground if the AFL’s appallingly bad record on punishments are the centre plank of your defence.

What you’re actually pointing out is the whole problem. Footballers have never had the incentive to truly change their behaviour because deep down they know it’s not career ending.

The sad thing is they’re right.

Watch how quickly that all stops when one of them actually gets the punishment they would get in the real world.

“The public humiliation is punishment enough.”

It’s really not. In fact, the public condemnation has been weaker than American coffee.

Brendon Gale said he was a ‘goose’ and Richmond football manager Dan Richardson described the incident as “a bit of a hiccup”.

In fact, Dusty has received a fair bit of support from people, despite the fact hethreatened to kill someone.

In conclusion, I’m resigned to Martin receiving some weak punishment like twelve weeks suspended (I’d loved to be proved wrong).

But Richmond and the AFL, let’s all remember the next time you ape support for ending violence against women that when actually tested to underpin those words with action you didn’t.