Why?rodgerfox wrote:Did I read correctly that Lyon hasn't had any contact with Lovett since the 'incident'?
Wow. Surely that couldn't be right?
Lovett lodges notice of grievance with club
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
You don't think that says a bit about what the club's real intentions are in regards to Lovett's future?plugger66 wrote:Why?rodgerfox wrote:Did I read correctly that Lyon hasn't had any contact with Lovett since the 'incident'?
Wow. Surely that couldn't be right?
This may be an important factor how Lovett's and the law sees this 'suspension'.
-
asiu
-
meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7223
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 516 times
Article by Sam Lane this morning.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/p ... -ng4g.html
Possibly interesting that Anderson couldn't be reached yesterday. I fear that this might be in danger of becoming an extremely sticky situation and that the AFL is wanting to keep well clear.
I'm starting to fear that some or all of the following might apply (warning, all of this is hypothetical: I'm not trying to comment on the actual case, about which I know nothing more than the rest of you).
A sexual assault case where charges could immediately be laid would generally require one of (a) a confession from the alleged perpetrator; (b) definitive evidence of physical violence (as opposed simply to sexual activity), or (c) a witness other than the victim who is prepared to go into the witness box and state that they either observed a sexual act without consent or (although this is weaker) heard the perpetrator say that they performed a sexual act without consent.
Imagine a case in which the police don't have (a), (b) or (c) (or some other definitive evidence that I can't think of right now) to work with. If nothing else, if the police had (c), that would surely constitute a prima facie case and the alleged perpetrator would be charged.
However, imagine if the potential other witnesses, even though they can't state on oath that they saw or heard what took place place, are absolutely convinced in their own minds that an assault occurred: eg, because of the subsequent behaviour of one or both of the parties involved. Not enough for a prima facie case, but enough for perhaps wanting to have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged perpetrator ever again in their lives. Unfortunately, one of the witnesses works with the alleged perpetrator and he and his colleagues are so disgusted that they aren't prepared to work with him any longer.
Meanwhile, what are the police doing? They can't close the case, but likewise they can't move to lay charges. So they wait. And, if the allegations are extremely serious and are getting a lot of public scrutiny, they may be prepared to wait a fair while. After all, the alleged perpetrator might get drunk and let something slip to somebody.
So how does this sort of situation get resolved? I'm not sure, to be honest.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/p ... -ng4g.html
Possibly interesting that Anderson couldn't be reached yesterday. I fear that this might be in danger of becoming an extremely sticky situation and that the AFL is wanting to keep well clear.
I'm starting to fear that some or all of the following might apply (warning, all of this is hypothetical: I'm not trying to comment on the actual case, about which I know nothing more than the rest of you).
A sexual assault case where charges could immediately be laid would generally require one of (a) a confession from the alleged perpetrator; (b) definitive evidence of physical violence (as opposed simply to sexual activity), or (c) a witness other than the victim who is prepared to go into the witness box and state that they either observed a sexual act without consent or (although this is weaker) heard the perpetrator say that they performed a sexual act without consent.
Imagine a case in which the police don't have (a), (b) or (c) (or some other definitive evidence that I can't think of right now) to work with. If nothing else, if the police had (c), that would surely constitute a prima facie case and the alleged perpetrator would be charged.
However, imagine if the potential other witnesses, even though they can't state on oath that they saw or heard what took place place, are absolutely convinced in their own minds that an assault occurred: eg, because of the subsequent behaviour of one or both of the parties involved. Not enough for a prima facie case, but enough for perhaps wanting to have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged perpetrator ever again in their lives. Unfortunately, one of the witnesses works with the alleged perpetrator and he and his colleagues are so disgusted that they aren't prepared to work with him any longer.
Meanwhile, what are the police doing? They can't close the case, but likewise they can't move to lay charges. So they wait. And, if the allegations are extremely serious and are getting a lot of public scrutiny, they may be prepared to wait a fair while. After all, the alleged perpetrator might get drunk and let something slip to somebody.
So how does this sort of situation get resolved? I'm not sure, to be honest.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
-
GrumpyOne
-
GrumpyOne
I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
I will have a guess and say the person you upset the least at the Saints is neither of those 2 and AL upset that person twice in 4 weeks.GrumpyOne wrote:I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
-
barks4eva
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10748
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:39pm
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Yeah is that right,gazrat wrote:morning everyone
You don't think that says a bit about what the club's real intentions are in regards to Lovett's future?
a lot of em don't think , thats the problem
considering you once posted, "it is my understanding that Thomas would step aside if he thought there was someone better to do the job"
and you believed every word
You took everything Thomas said as gospel and you like to think of yourself as mr perceptive up with all the machinations,
yeah like Thomas is going to step aside, forsake $500,000 a year plus potential bonuses, when he has 8 kids and a Brighton mansion to maintain, leaving aside the fact that Thomas couldn't even lie straight in bed
and you saddle up to your bum boy and have the gall to say other people don't have cognitive awareness!
GET REAL
DO THE MATHS AND THE SQUARES ARE ALL ROOTED.
Ross Lyon rules with an iron fist hey P66?plugger66 wrote:I will have a guess and say the person you upset the least at the Saints is neither of those 2 and AL upset that person twice in 4 weeks.GrumpyOne wrote:I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
Hope he is fair as well.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
I reckon he is very fair if you do the right thing by him which seems fair enough to me.joffaboy wrote:Ross Lyon rules with an iron fist hey P66?plugger66 wrote:I will have a guess and say the person you upset the least at the Saints is neither of those 2 and AL upset that person twice in 4 weeks.GrumpyOne wrote:I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
Hope he is fair as well.
Yeah - nothing wrong with being hard but fair.plugger66 wrote:I reckon he is very fair if you do the right thing by him which seems fair enough to me.joffaboy wrote:Ross Lyon rules with an iron fist hey P66?plugger66 wrote:I will have a guess and say the person you upset the least at the Saints is neither of those 2 and AL upset that person twice in 4 weeks.GrumpyOne wrote:I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
Hope he is fair as well.
I wouldn't like to get on the wrong side of Lyon and Lovett did twice in 4 weeks as you say.
Not only did he completely stuff up, but made Lyon look like a goose for selecting him.
I dont reckon Lyon would apologise for his attitude, he is trying to win a flag and do it his way or goodbye.
Denis Pagan was known as a hard pr!ck in the 90's at North, and many players didn't see eye to eye with him. However if Lyon could replicate Pagans record in the 90's (8 PF's, 3 GF's and two flags), I reckon most would be pretty satisified.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
-
White Winmar
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 10:02pm
MB is right about the police being prepared to wait things out if there isn't quite enough evidence to charge AL at this stage. It is common in serious cases for them to complete their investigations as far as possible, then leave the case open in the belief that in time, the required evidence may become available. This usually means a reluctant witness coming forward, or other previously unknown information coming to light. If this is the case here, then AL may be left in limbo for a long time, as there is no statute of limitations on laying a rape charge. Let's hope both sides (AL/AFLPA and the club) can work out a solution.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
yep...but for once..i'm not saying that go is heading down the wrong track either.....plugger66 wrote:I will have a guess and say the person you upset the least at the Saints is neither of those 2 and AL upset that person twice in 4 weeks.GrumpyOne wrote:I have no evidence in support of any finger-pointing, but the two who would have the most influence would be our major sponsor and our marquee player.SENsaintsational wrote:Who GO? Sponsor? Player? Players? Coach?GrumpyOne wrote:Still think that someone has delivered an ultimatum to the StKFC which led to Lovett being suspended, and its not the AFL.
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
White Winmar wrote:MB is right about the police being prepared to wait things out if there isn't quite enough evidence to charge AL at this stage. It is common in serious cases for them to complete their investigations as far as possible, then leave the case open in the belief that in time, the required evidence may become available. This usually means a reluctant witness coming forward, or other previously unknown information coming to light. If this is the case here, then AL may be left in limbo for a long time, as there is no statute of limitations on laying a rape charge. Let's hope both sides (AL/AFLPA and the club) can work out a solution.
imhfo...you are both right....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10783
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 830 times
Weekly time trials can only mean one of two things.S.A Saint wrote:its interesting thou that he is receiving weekly training and is completing weekly time trials....make of that what you want, but i think that there is still a good chance that if all the charges are dropped that he will play for us...saintlee wrote:Not if the coach and leadership group don't want him there, which they don't.TwoTowers wrote:Andrew Lovett has every right to be training with the club. He has not been charged with an offence and it is looking increasingly likely that he will not be. Was there ever anything in it? Ignore the pitiful rumours that have been spread around on this forum. Lovett wants to be vindicated and wants to play footy with the Saints. Prove I'm wrong.
Not if he is suspended by the club for alleged rape.
Think its pretty clear that he has no right to train with the club at this time.
That may change if the allegation is dropped. But I think he has already blown his chance with the Saints.
Either the club is hoping no charges will be laid and he will return to the fold fully fit.
OR
the club is hoping that he will become dispirited, under train, lose fitness as proved by the time trials and they can then use that as an excuse to terminate his contract.
If it is the former, their will be a permanent heap of bitterness that will be hard to ever overcome.
Lovett seems to believe he is innocent and has been badly treated.
It is a bit like someone telling their parents that they are innocent of an allegation and then having the parents reject and shun them because their innocence is yet to be proven.
Later innocence proven, the parents then ask that someone to make a special effort and show them some loyalty because they are family.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
-
meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7223
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 516 times
Jumping to conclusions a bit, aren't you? Lovett spent two hours with the cops and (presumably) either said very little or else gave a version of the events in which he didn't do anything wrong. He has not yet been charged with anything and has now decided to challenge his suspension by the club.ace wrote:Lovett seems to believe he is innocent and has been badly treated.
It is a bit like someone telling their parents that they are innocent of an allegation and then having the parents reject and shun them because their innocence is yet to be proven.
Later innocence proven, the parents then ask that someone to make a special effort and show them some loyalty because they are family.
All of these actions, most likely taken on the basis of advice from highly-paid lawyers, are intended to increase his prospects of being cleared of any charges and being allowed to resume his lucrative career as an AFL player.
However, none of this in any way suggests that he "believes" he is innocent and has been treated badly. Given that he has decided (for whatever reason) not to confess to the alleged crime and take the consequences, then this is the only sensible way to behave.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
Weekly time trials can only mean one of two things.ace wrote:[ed that he will play for us...
Either the club is hoping no charges will be laid and he will return to the fold fully fit.
OR
the club is hoping that he will become dispirited, under train, lose fitness as proved by the time trials and they can then use that as an excuse to terminate his contract.
If it is the former, their will be a permanent heap of bitterness that will be hard to ever overcome.
Lovett seems to believe he is innocent and has been badly treated.
[/quote]
i hope you meant latter..not former....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
sainterinsydney
- Club Player
- Posts: 781
- Joined: Mon 30 Nov 2009 11:03am
- Been thanked: 22 times
sainterinsydney wrote:I thought your innocent till proven guilty, not the other way around? An allegation is just that--an allegation. At the moment, Lovett is in neutral territory.
yep.....you are...but as some journo said recently.....this morning actually...
"In the eyes of the law, the individual's rights are paramount - a man is innocent until proven otherwise. In the disciplined AFL team, the needs of ''we'' will always outweigh the rights of ''me.'
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
GrumpyOne
-
sainterinsydney
- Club Player
- Posts: 781
- Joined: Mon 30 Nov 2009 11:03am
- Been thanked: 22 times
True, but what happens if the charges are dropped? In my eye Lovett should then be allowed to play again. I think it would grossly unjust to not only the fans but Lovett himself if he was ostracised following the charges being dropped. I expect to see Lovett playing if no charges are laid; if charges are laid, then I would expect him to face serious scrutiny.
Also, I don't care if certain players might hate or dislike him. All clubs have animosity between certain players. I would expect him to then be allowed to prove himself on the field.
Also, I don't care if certain players might hate or dislike him. All clubs have animosity between certain players. I would expect him to then be allowed to prove himself on the field.