4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

from what i read, he is only asking for $1m. if that would be a final payment (i.e. no possibility of later claims) then i'd expect essendrugs would cough up to avoid the the obvious problems and costs of a dragged out court case(s). wouldn't be surprised if the issue is not so much the money but ensuing the finality of any claims.

The article said anything about his daughter would have to be separate 

7 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Panahi far from being a loose cannon is a very informed and motivated commentor. No scattergun here.

Gil would be wise to be most respectful of her. 

She is certainly a loose Cannon as far as AFL HQ is concerned

when she was on SEN with Daniel Hartford a couple of years ago she would often go Hard Core on what was happening at Drug Central

12 minutes ago, biggestred said:

The article said anything about his daughter would have to be separate 

oh, ok, that would then be a definite sticking point then

43 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

But if Lovett-Murray is initiating the action, wouldn't the burden of proof, on the balance or probabilities, be on him to show that the supplements were damaging, not the other way around? 

His manager (Peter Jess) was on SEN this morning and basically said it is a similar process to all of the other Dons and ex Dons players. L-M is seeking compensation, all of the other players (bar 1) have settled. 

L-M with his legal team and medical team have a figure they want as compo and it is the legals arguing over what it is worth. Jess can't understand how there is even an agreement just settle it and get it over with.

His daughter would be a totally different claim but because they can't prove what was or wasn't given it is very complex and there has been different opinions on if there could be a link to L-M daughter but it is ongoing. 

Sad, terrible set of events. Why the hell has Dank not been brought to task on this is beyond me.

 

20 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

from what i read, he is only asking for $1m. if that would be a final payment (i.e. no possibility of later claims) then i'd expect essendrugs would cough up to avoid the the obvious problems and costs of a dragged out court case(s). wouldn't be surprised if the issue is not so much the money but ensuing the finality of any claims.

Jess said it wasn't that much but in the ball park but the lawyers are arguing over the sum.

Just came across this article on the AFL site

a certain synchronicity perhaps

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-08/afls-integrity-unit-head-departs-for-monaco

THE AFL'S head of competition integrity, Brett Clothier, is leaving the League after more than eight years to take up a key position in international athletics.

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Just came across this article on the AFL site

a certain synchronicity perhaps

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-08/afls-integrity-unit-head-departs-for-monaco

THE AFL'S head of competition integrity, Brett Clothier, is leaving the League after more than eight years to take up a key position in international athletics.

FIFA ?

1 hour ago, Cards13 said:

His manager (Peter Jess) was on SEN this morning and basically said it is a similar process to all of the other Dons and ex Dons players. L-M is seeking compensation, all of the other players (bar 1) have settled. 

L-M with his legal team and medical team have a figure they want as compo and it is the legals arguing over what it is worth. Jess can't understand how there is even an agreement just settle it and get it over with.

His daughter would be a totally different claim but because they can't prove what was or wasn't given it is very complex and there has been different opinions on if there could be a link to L-M daughter but it is ongoing. 

Sad, terrible set of events. Why the hell has Dank not been brought to task on this is beyond me.

 

Just to clarify, hasn't Dank been banned from basically anything involving sport? Or just the AFL? Personally I think he should be in gaol, but I'm not sure what law(s) he might have broken.

19 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Just to clarify, hasn't Dank been banned from basically anything involving sport? Or just the AFL? Personally I think he should be in gaol, but I'm not sure what law(s) he might have broken.

essendrug have tried to deflect blame to virtually anybody except dank. it's obvious they don't want to push him too hard......i wonder why

and the essendrug friendly media don't seem too inclined to put much heat on the keeper of skeletons and bottom drawers

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Just to clarify, hasn't Dank been banned from basically anything involving sport? Or just the AFL? Personally I think he should be in gaol, but I'm not sure what law(s) he might have broken.

How has he not had to answer 1 question during the whole saga?

21 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

How has he not had to answer 1 question during the whole saga?

Because no one can force him to. 

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

from what i read, he is only asking for $1m. if that would be a final payment (i.e. no possibility of later claims) then i'd expect essendrugs would cough up to avoid the the obvious problems and costs of a dragged out court case(s). wouldn't be surprised if the issue is not so much the money but ensuing the finality of any claims.

good luck getting Essendon to pay anyone for any wrong doing.

70,ooo members @ $1000.00 Levy per year should cover it......

Wow this will never end. Judging by the comments section of that story, after this finally calms down it'll be the EFC propaganda department suing the club for overwork after their typing fingers fall off. 

5 hours ago, beelzebub said:

I may well be wrong

but i thought in the case of civil action it becomes incumbent upon the defendant to prove beyond reasonable probability.

Love to see how EFC do that.

Hopefully a legal type can clarify.

I am not a lawyer, but understand that the requirement in a civil case is balance of probabilities.  

Still, does he know with what he was injected?  Can Dank be subpoenaed?  And what if Dank is and says he has no records?   All very difficult.

2 hours ago, Chris said:

Because no one can force him to. 

Ys they can. A court can force him but ho-one has taken him to court. I wonder why?

14 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Ys they can. A court can force him but ho-one has taken him to court. I wonder why?

No they can't.

This is a civil matter and if he doesn't want to appear, then he won't.

25 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Ys they can. A court can force him but ho-one has taken him to court. I wonder why?

not as simple as that.... if you call a witness you cannot challenge that witness (cross examine) unless you can declare the witness hostile. To have a witness declared hostile is a legal process which at its simplest requires you to show that the witness told you one thing and then when he/she takes the stand says something diametrically opposed. Not very easy in practice.

There are also rules that excuse a witness from answering if the answer might incriminate the witness.

All in all a minefield.

On the other hand the Australian Crime Commission who kicked this saga off has some very fancy powers but I cannot see them getting involved... requires a formal referral etc

PS The irony is that in the original AFL tribunal decision there was lots of talk about he failure to call witnesses and what if any presumptions could be brought to bear as a result of that action

Edited June 9, 20178 yr by Diamond_Jim

There is a person in this saga who could bring this whole business to a head in my opinion who is not at TWSNBN for one reason or another.

All it says to me is, if that is really happening to that poor little girl, they really took some super serious drugs then didn't they. Im surprised some of their players didn't glow in the dark..

24 minutes ago, Wadda We Sing said:

All it says to me is, if that is really happening to that poor little girl, they really took some super serious drugs then didn't they. Im surprised some of their players didn't glow in the dark..

They took drugs meant for horses and they took drugs meant for treatment of multiple sclerosis. Very very fortunate to only go down for TB4.

Dank was reckless beyond belief and EFC and AFL have just stood back and let him get away with it.

Dank is the guy who gave growth stimulants to a rugby player who had had cancer, who later died of that cancer. If there's one thing cancer cells love, it's a growth stimulant.

Dank also sued reporters who said he gave warfarin (a blood thinner) to Cronulla players. (Do you reckon they get many bruises?) He won the case but was awarded minimal damages because the jury accepted he had done much worse things!

Who wants this bloke injecting ANYTHING into them?

5 hours ago, Chris said:

Because no one can force him to. 

I just find it incredible that this one guy, who was at multiple AFL and league clubs, was the sole architect and has cost clubs millions and millions of $$, put players lives and mental states at risk let alone unknown issues for the future... and he just wanders off.

9 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

No they can't.

This is a civil matter and if he doesn't want to appear, then he won't.

My understanding is that NLM could issue Dank with a civil subpoena and if Dank was a 'no show' then he could be charged with contempt of court and be hit with jail time.

He could however, refuse to answer any questions that he felt would incriminate him.

That's my 'uneducated in all matters legal' take.

BTW I've mentioned this before, there's one bloke who was paid close to $1 mil to make sure the records he has, or had, never see the light of day. I was told that by a very reliable source.

7 hours ago, M_9 said:

My understanding is that NLM could issue Dank with a civil subpoena and if Dank was a 'no show' then he could be charged with contempt of court and be hit with jail time.

He could however, refuse to answer any questions that he felt would incriminate him.

That's my 'uneducated in all matters legal' take.

BTW I've mentioned this before, there's one bloke who was paid close to $1 mil to make sure the records he has, or had, never see the light of day. I was told that by a very reliable source.

Ah yes, the weapon. He shut up shop very quickly. 

"Say that again?!"