Lovett on Rape Charge

[Enrico_Misso]

Presumably this is now grounds for suspending his payments.

Whilst I agree he is not the sort of person we want at our club.
And I believe his decision to go out a matter of hours after being specifically warned to keep out of trouble, and put himself in this situation is sufficient grounds for severing our ties with him.

What happens if he is found not guilty?

That is quite likely as ultimately it is one persons word against another.
If that happens and we have cut ties with him, can he then sue us for unfair dismissal?

[mbogo]

If the accusations turn out to be correct then he should spend time behind bars - end of story - end of contract and of his lucrative AFL career! He will go down as one of the biggest f'wits in VFL/AFL history.
The chances of him ever putting on an AFL jumper on field again are absolutely miniscule.
Whilst I wanted him to play - now I am thanking the gods he never played a game for us.

[Eastern]

If the accusations turn out to be correct then he should spend time behind bars - end of story - end of contract and of his lucrative AFL career! He will go down as one of the biggest f'wits in VFL/AFL history.
The chances of him ever putting on an AFL jumper on field again are absolutely miniscule.
Whilst I wanted him to play - now I am thanking the gods he never played a game for us.

Some Lawyer on 3AW with Gerard & BT suggested that if convicted AL faces 6 years with a minimum of 4. Also said that would probably take another 10 months before any trial. If accurate, CAREER OVER !!

[meher baba]

Presumably this is now grounds for suspending his payments.

Whilst I agree he is not the sort of person we want at our club.
And I believe his decision to go out a matter of hours after being specifically warned to keep out of trouble, and put himself in this situation is sufficient grounds for severing our ties with him.

What happens if he is found not guilty?

That is quite likely as ultimately it is one persons word against another.
If that happens and we have cut ties with him, can he then sue us for unfair dismissal?

I suspect the club is currently trying to work out if they can sack him before he goes to trial on the grounds of behaviour that brings the club into disrepute.

I'm no lawyer, but I would have thought they wouldn't be able to do this. But, if they can, it's the best way to go because of the significant possibility that a jury might not find him guilty.

The second best option would be to negotiate a settlement with Lovett to pay out his contract. Then, if he is found not guilty, Lovett would have some chance of starting afresh somewhere else.


I really hope the AFL doesn't stick it's oar in like it did with Cousins. It would be totally unnecessary grandstanding on their part and could even prejudice the trial.

[Ryanstein]

Worst thing is the headline says St Kilda player charged with rape.

Should say F*ing Essendon player

[mbogo]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

[older saint]

True but allegedly there was an out of court settlement regarding those matters which would imply something. Civil burden of proof is less than the criminal one

What exactly was it that you are alleging was "settled out of court"?

At around the time of the M&M allegations, three high profile players from other clubs were alleged to have made a large ($200k) out of court settlement in a civil case launched by a woman in Adelaide.

I do not recall any suggestion that St Kilda paid anybody anything in 2004: I'm not saying it didn't happen, but all I recall is that the police eventually dropped the charges for insufficient evidence.

NO not that one and not under the table and not by the club either allegedly. More recent than that .
NOt so much the point just a little bit of double standards because people have grown fond of others their situation seems to be washed away.
If Lovett guilty then throw everything at him but the club cannot act on emotional decision as it could well cost them even more than his contract in the long run if charges are dropped or innocence found.

[saint66au]

Just in case you thought Saintsational was a bit feral sometimes....may I offer these pearls of wisdom on the sunject from the pages of Facebook...

seriously this sucks! But we have to remember that everyone is innocent until proven guilty and is the chick a hoe? There are some NASTY girls around who make up stories for attention but Saints have to make a stand! Maybe saints players should become "saints" by not having sex unless it is with their partner!!!!!!! (like that'll ever happen..lol)

or..

and what about the other St Kilda player he was with,, does anything happen to him? It was Grams place after all

or...

also have you all forgotten Milne was up for the same charges a few years ago??? He still play's....INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

or

Get him of the bludey team and send him to prison and put Luke ball back on the team

Dear oh dear oh dear...

[satchmo]

NOt so much the point just a little bit of double standards because people have grown fond of others their situation seems to be washed away.

No, the point is Lovett HAS BEEN CHARGED.

No double standard and nothing to do with being fond of anyone.

[Bernard Shakey]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

I'm so glad you feel that way NOW.

[satchmo]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

I'm so glad you feel that way NOW.

Maybe mbogo wasn't there.

[Bernard Shakey]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

I'm so glad you feel that way NOW.

Maybe mbogo wasn't there.

No doubt, but his defence of the person in question has been there.

[mbogo]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

I'm so glad you feel that way NOW.

Yeah - well Bernard - I understand you have been saying the same story all along - I just was not prepared to believe some random nameless turkey on a footy forum.
I am happy to have changed my tune at this point - I wanted him to play - call me an optimist - THAT aint a crime!
Now he is charged there is obviously solid evidence (which may or may not prove conclusive) .. and perhaps you could explain to me why I should believe heresay in the first instance (or your opinion) anyway?

[saintspremiers]

NOt so much the point just a little bit of double standards because people have grown fond of others their situation seems to be washed away.

No, the point is Lovett HAS BEEN CHARGED.

No double standard and nothing to do with being fond of anyone.

But why wasn't M&M charged?

Was there hush money?

I dunno, we will never know, best we just forget about that one, it was years ago and it's done and dusted now, and they are both now cleanskins, with a very good track record since that event.

Anyway, back on topic, I'm glad we finally have some movement in this.

Time to sack Lovett, or as others have said, the AFL should deregister the prick.

As far as the club is concerned, he is gone, regardless of the court case.

The cops would rarely charge someone on rape without some decent evidence........please correct me if I'm wrong on this.

[satchmo]

But why wasn't M&M charged?

The DPP decided that they had not committed the offence they were to be charged with. Which, from memory, was sexual misconduct.

A friend of mine who has read the police report described what happened to me, and I would say it was sad/unfortunate/foolish.

[bigred]

But why wasn't M&M charged?

Was there hush money?

I dunno, we will never know, best we just forget about that one, it was years ago and it's done and dusted now, and they are both now cleanskins, with a very good track record since that event.

Perhaps it is because they had nothing to answer?

Has no relevance to Andrew Lovett....at all.
Never did, never will.

Hush money indeed.

[Bernard Shakey]

But why wasn't M&M charged?

The DPP decided that they had not committed the offence they were to be charged with. Which, from memory, was sexual misconduct.

A friend of mine who has read the police report described what happened to me, and I would say it was sad/unfortunate/foolish.

The DPP did not decide they had not committed the offence, that is not within his charter. He decided there was no likelihood of obtaining a conviction in the case, probably due to insufficient evidence. A decision that was not well received, at the time, in some circles.

[Bernard Shakey]

Now the case is in the law's hands - no one will be touching it with a 10ft pole. This is one sticky m-er f-er of a f*cked up situation.
Now I am relieved we did not let him train.
Even if innocent now - the mess of the "facts" as presented in court will make this an almighty cesspit of crap for us the wade through.
I feel for Gram now - and of course the alleged victim.

I'm so glad you feel that way NOW.

Yeah - well Bernard - I understand you have been saying the same story all along - I just was not prepared to believe some random nameless turkey on a footy forum.
I am happy to have changed my tune at this point - I wanted him to play - call me an optimist - THAT aint a crime!
Now he is charged there is obviously solid evidence (which may or may not prove conclusive) .. and perhaps you could explain to me why I should believe heresay in the first instance (or your opinion) anyway?

No you shouldn't believe heresay or anybody's opinion at all.
It's just that I don't see what's changed now. The fact that charges have been laid changes nothing, he's still innocent in the eyes of the law.

I have always trusted the reaction of the Club in this matter.

[St Michele]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.
.

I just wanted to say yes people have been charged and proven innocent. I personally know someone who went through hell when charged with an offence similar to this ( before the DNA days) and he was innocent. Eventually the girl concerned admitted such but only after ruining both his professional and private life.

We have to remember within out legal system someone charged isinnocent until proven guilty. This is something I truely believe in and will withold my judgment until he has had his day in court because if I was charged with anything that is what I would expect ot happen to me.

I would have thought in reality the club would have to wait until the trial is over and guilt accertained before taking any further action.

Off my soap box

Michele

[avid]

Just in case you thought Saintsational was a bit feral sometimes....may I offer these pearls of wisdom on the sunject from the pages of Facebook...

seriously this sucks! But we have to remember that everyone is innocent until proven guilty and is the chick a hoe? There are some NASTY girls around who make up stories for attention but Saints have to make a stand! Maybe saints players should become "saints" by not having sex unless it is with their partner!!!!!!! (like that'll ever happen..lol)

or..

and what about the other St Kilda player he was with,, does anything happen to him? It was Grams place after all

or...

also have you all forgotten Milne was up for the same charges a few years ago??? He still play's....INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

or

Get him of the bludey team and send him to prison and put Luke ball back on the team

Dear oh dear oh dear...

God that's bad!
You forget how stupid humanity can get.

The AL discussion on this forum has been pretty impressive I reckon. Lots of difference in opinion, intelligently and fairly debated in the main.
A few ratty posts here and there, but nothing in the class of these ones.

Thanks S66 for the interesting perspective.

[bergholt]

So you are saying we keep him on the books for what could be at least a year and if he is found not guilty he plays. What if the club know something that may not make him guilty in the eyes of the law but also do not make him innocent.

all i was saying was that legally it was hard for us to get rid of him - until the court case nothing has changed with the charge.

but according to caro's story that's not exactly true:

"The final result - the Individual Conduct Policy - gives the competition's governing body the power to stand down a player charged with a serious offence. Now that Lovett has been charged and despite the fact he plans to vigorously protest that he is innocent the AFL should intervene and circumnavigate the grievance procedure."

"charged with a serious offence" is sufficient for the afl's policy to kick in, so i hope they take her advice and make it no longer our problem - because legally i think we're still in the wrong if we get rid of him.

[ausfatcat]

Sp the AF: can sack him but can St Kilda?

[St.Rob8]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.
.

I just wanted to say yes people have been charged and proven innocent. I personally know someone who went through hell when charged with an offence similar to this ( before the DNA days) and he was innocent. Eventually the girl concerned admitted such but only after ruining both his professional and private life.

We have to remember within out legal system someone charged isinnocent until proven guilty. This is something I truely believe in and will withold my judgment until he has had his day in court because if I was charged with anything that is what I would expect ot happen to me.

I would have thought in reality the club would have to wait until the trial is over and guilt accertained before taking any further action.

Off my soap box

Michele

Remember Ben Cousins was never charged or even contravened the AFLs drug policy, yet was de-registered by the AFL.

There is NO WAY St Kilda OR the AFL will let a player facing this charge play. The ONLY way he will EVER play is if he is found innocent some time in 2011 and ANOTHER club takes a punt on him in 2012.

[markp]

Age/Caro...

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/s ... -o2xp.html

St Kilda looking to sack Lovett
CAROLINE WILSON
February 16, 2010

ANY flimsy hope Andrew Lovett held of resuming an AFL career looks finished. St Kilda was working through last night to find the best of several legal avenues to dismiss the footballer charged late yesterday on one count of rape. Whether or not the Saints succeed they appear determined to cut him no matter the outcome.

The leadership group at St Kilda do not want the former Essendon midfielder at the club, the board do not want to be associated with him and everyone concerned must be wondering just how it was they traded a first-round draft pick for a player with Lovett's personal history.



Hun/Ralph...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 5830680065

Saint Kilda recruit Andrew Lovett charged with rape but fights to resume his AFL career

Mark Buttler, Jon Ralph From: Herald Sun February 16, 2010 12:00AM


AFL star Andrew Lovett will fight for his footballing future after being charged with rape.

Lovett - already on an indefinite suspension from the Saints - will face court on Friday after being served with a summons by investigators on Monday.

But next week he will take the battle to resume his career to an AFL grievance tribunal hearing.

Lovett, who signed a three-year, $1 million deal with St Kilda, is earning up to $7000 a week from the club despite his suspension.

[joffaboy]

Lovett, who signed a three-year, $1 million deal with St Kilda, is earning up to $7000 a week from the club despite his suspension.

Wow - thats better coin than making numberplates.