9 hours ago, daisycutter said:

the club flick-passed it to the afl. if there is a follow up it should first come from the afl. it could be that all parties plus the afl and club feel that the matter is closed and no ongoing publicity (i.e. communication) is the best solution in the circumstances and the media has agreed..........there again...........................

The nature of the allegation and the widespread publicity it briefly received, mean no further comment is not a feasible outcome. I imagine if the woman is unwilling to return to Bali to make a formal, criminal complaint that there may be some attempt at mediation between the parties in order to give her a respectful hearing, even an apology if that is what she wants.

(I am not suggesting I know anything about what actually happened - the possibilities range from a grievous assault through to a misunderstanding between two young people as to what their respective feelings and intentions were at the time of the incident.)

Even if mediation satisfied the woman's concerns the AFL and the club must make clear how the issue resolved or a cloud is left over too many players. But if the woman returns to Bali to make a complaint then we could be waiting a long time to hear more.

 

Cannot tolerate this thread, at all. Poorly managed alleged incident; poorly developed into a real witch-hunt. In Melbourne during the week, without encouragement, guys in a pub we convinced of some errant insider information that the player concerned in the allegations was identifiable and outwardly stated that case. Rather sickening, really. Speculation and all-knowing rumours destroy one's faith in the processes of law and/or the sanctity of innocence before proven guilt. Sorry state of affairs.

40 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Cannot tolerate this thread, at all. Poorly managed alleged incident; poorly developed into a real witch-hunt. In Melbourne during the week, without encouragement, guys in a pub we convinced of some errant insider information that the player concerned in the allegations was identifiable and outwardly stated that case. Rather sickening, really. Speculation and all-knowing rumours destroy one's faith in the processes of law and/or the sanctity of innocence before proven guilt. Sorry state of affairs.

Agree totally! 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, pitmaster said:

The nature of the allegation and the widespread publicity it briefly received, mean no further comment is not a feasible outcome.

If there was an incident but the woman involved doesn't want to pursue it for whatever reason then to me no further comment is the only feasible outcome.

Should the club come out and name the player involved in said incident when he could be totally innocent? should they say it's been investigated and handled when maybe there is no conclusion because she doesn't want to speak to the club or AFL?I mean why should she, they are hardly relevant & non biased legal authorities.

I know it would be good to have a conclusion, everything nicely wrapped up but sometimes this is not possible.

I would be interested to know who leaked the story though....

 

11 hours ago, daisycutter said:

the club flick-passed it to the afl. if there is a follow up it should first come from the afl. it could be that all parties plus the afl and club feel that the matter is closed and no ongoing publicity (i.e. communication) is the best solution in the circumstances and the media has agreed..........there again...........................

DC i personally feel the club should comment regardless of what the AFL does. As Pitmaster said “the nature of the allegation” warrants this much regardless of the outcome. 

46 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

DC i personally feel the club should comment regardless of what the AFL does. As Pitmaster said “the nature of the allegation” warrants this much regardless of the outcome. 

but......assuming the result is no further action and the incident is closed......what can they say that will satisfy everyone? I'd suggest they would say nothing of any great substance and all that would achieve would be raising more media, public awareness and discussion

let's not forget (a) we don't know the complainant (b) we don't know the accused and (c) we don't now the details of the complaint. We have been told the complainant doesn't wish to make a formal statement. In essence this issue hasn't even got to first base and we would have known nothing if someone hadn't leaked it and the media ran with it.  Interestingly the media dropped the whole story after one day. I agree with rjay's post above

Payback from the media for D'land supporters stance on different things,  maybe.........

10 hours ago, daisycutter said:

but......assuming the result is no further action and the incident is closed......what can they say that will satisfy everyone? I'd suggest they would say nothing of any great substance and all that would achieve would be raising more media, public awareness and discussion

let's not forget (a) we don't know the complainant (b) we don't know the accused and (c) we don't now the details of the complaint. We have been told the complainant doesn't wish to make a formal statement. In essence this issue hasn't even got to first base and we would have known nothing if someone hadn't leaked it and the media ran with it.  Interestingly the media dropped the whole story after one day. I agree with rjay's post above

Spot on dc. Further statements would only give oxygen to rumours. If the case goes no further the two parties, the club and the AFL would be best served by saying nothing and getting on with life. It's a delicate situation for both accused and accuser, the worst outcome without a formal complaint or charges would be for them to be publicly named.

Edited December 30, 20177 yr by Moonshadow

22 hours ago, Biffen said:

Without knowing anything about the case. It's always the girls' fault for the way she dresses and behaves-on that I'm sure we all agree.

Is there a double face palm emoji?

Hey mods, I think we need one and a tongue in cheek one while your at it.

On 30/12/2017 at 8:59 AM, Bombay Airconditioning said:

DC i personally feel the club should comment regardless of what the AFL does. As Pitmaster said “the nature of the allegation” warrants this much regardless of the outcome. 

There's a serious amount of wankery I this thread. How about everyone gets off their high horse and stop mindless speculation and stop demanding action from anyone about an unknown incident that may or may not have any semblance of truth to it.

Question: HS now has a headline article with a spokesperson from CASA on their website in relation to handling of the ‘rape case’ (sentence 1), and the word ‘alleged’ doesn’t appear until the third sentence, strangely enough prefixed with a hyphen.

With all due respect to all parties here, from a legalese perspective is ‘rape case’ considered the same way as ‘alleged rape’ or ‘alleged sexual assault’? 

To me, the change of tone is concerning... (they’ll probably update the article 5 times before I even post this reply of course, it’s the HS after all)

 

Quote

The Herald Sun sent a list of questions to the AFL about what it was doing, and what it had done in regards to the case.

The AFL declined to respond.

 

39 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

 

Decline as they should. The last place this should be played out in is the esteemed journalistic columns of The Hun

Edited January 2, 20187 yr by Moonshadow

Seems to me like the mfc and the afl have played a straight bat and referred the matter to the police....

The police are doing their thing so how, herald sun, have the afl dropped the ball?

 

1 hour ago, Kiss of Death said:

HS now has a headline article with a spokesperson from CASA on their website

What has CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) got to do with it?

For that matter what has the AFL got to do with it...the so called spokesperson seems to think they (AFL) have more authority in Bali than the Vic Police. It would seem neither have any...

I'm not a fan of the way the AFL run their business but without any charges they can't be expected to be judge and jury. Surely they can only act after the law has run it's course.

Edited January 2, 20187 yr by rjay

9 hours ago, rjay said:

What has CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) got to do with it?

For that matter what has the AFL got to do with it...the so called spokesperson seems to think they (AFL) have more authority in Bali than the Vic Police. It would seem neither have any...

I'm not a fan of the way the AFL run their business but without any charges they can't be expected to be judge and jury. Surely they can only act after the law has run it's course.

Chop Sticks no. 2

What a nothing article. CASA is actually VCASA (Victorian Centre Against Sexual Assault) and pretty much they want the AFL to bring the hammer down as if it occurred locally. If there are no charges (alleged victim has to go to Bali to make a complaint if this is to occur) I don't know how any action can be taken.

16 hours ago, biggestred said:

Seems to me like the mfc and the afl have played a straight bat and referred the matter to the police....

The police are doing their thing so how, herald sun, have the afl dropped the ball?

 

The AFL haven't dropped the ball. I am Gil's biggest critic. In respect to the actual game of Aussie Rules I don't always agree with how Gil handles things, and with many other things. But in relation to players, clubs and potential legal issues Gil has been exceptional. When Dustin Martin got in strife it was Gil who referred the issue to police and let them do their job. He didn't hang Martin out to dry like many wanted him to (especially the media). Gil let the facts determine the outcome and he is going to do the same here. The media in this country think their opinion should determine the outcome. I don't like Gil, but he is so many levels above those in the media that it is embarrassing to watch it all play out.

Looks like the AFL will weigh up the situation with or without police involvement. They will be judge, jury and perhaps executioner. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-supports-woman-who-has-accused-player-of-sexual-misconduct-20180103-h0d0dz.html

19 minutes ago, america de cali said:

Looks like the AFL will weigh up the situation with or without police involvement. They will be judge, jury and perhaps executioner. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-supports-woman-who-has-accused-player-of-sexual-misconduct-20180103-h0d0dz.html

So it looks like we have another level of law now...well maybe above the law as the AFL seems to place itself.

Not so sure about the AFL or any organisation apart from the appropriate legal authorities dealing with these issues.

The EFC saga is a case in point.

The illicit drugs policy is another.

Someone may convince me otherwise but at the moment I think it's treading a very dangerous path.

21 minutes ago, rjay said:

So it looks like we have another level of law now...well maybe above the law as the AFL seems to place itself.

Not so sure about the AFL or any organisation apart from the appropriate legal authorities dealing with these issues.

The EFC saga is a case in point.

The illicit drugs policy is another.

Someone may convince me otherwise but at the moment I think it's treading a very dangerous path.

This is the other side of the Broadcast deal. 

So much money has changed hands that the AFL is now a law unto itself. No wonder they wanted to be the Jury of Essendrug. They had to join the WADA Code. 

But this is not WADA. The AFL don’t care about laws within Countries. They will take one of their employees (players) to task regardless. 

I was waiting for this, the money paid to broadcasters was just too much. 

We don’t know what was or wasn’t done, ( i have been told who is involved)

The AFL is now “big brother”, the trade off for player wages being so high. 

I have been interested in the fact that the AFLPA have said nothing, which is why i thought this chapter was not over

A dangerous road is being carved. 

Regardless of whether anything was done, the AFL are now Lawmakers beyond the game of football. 

 

1 hour ago, america de cali said:

Looks like the AFL will weigh up the situation with or without police involvement. They will be judge, jury and perhaps executioner. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-supports-woman-who-has-accused-player-of-sexual-misconduct-20180103-h0d0dz.html

interesting how the article ends

Quote

Queensland University of Technology workplace harassment expert Professor Paula McDonald said organisations must take these complaints seriously, investigate them in a timely manner, employ experienced investigators, communicate with both parties openly on developments and ensure punishments are appropriate.

"Punishment is where a lot of organisations fall foul of good complaint or investigation processes," Professor McDonald said.

She added that best practice for an internal investigation on sexual misconduct allegations dictates that investigators should be satisfied "on the balance of probabilities" to find that the alleged incident did or did not occur.

That's different to a criminal hearing, in which the prosecution case has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.  

She also said that the AFL was not obliged, by best-practice standards, to investigate the matter because the player was on a personal holiday when the alleged incident happened.

 

The AFL must be very, very careful with their decisions and public statements. Not only are they at risk of exposing identities, but also opening themselves up should they not follow due process and civil fairness

The AFL are NOT squeaky clean as was evidenced this year. That said , we have a player with recourse, if necessary, to representation up to the highest echelons. Really interesting.........

And i don't know a bloody thing either....... other than the precedent has been set already for the AFL to pick up the players Legal Costs.

7 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

The AFL must be very, very careful with their decisions and public statements. Not only are they at risk of exposing identities, but also opening themselves up should they not follow due process and civil fairness

Civil fairness?

 

Care to explain what you mean by this?

 

Are you inventing a new legal standard?