Lovett sues for bullying

[GrumpyOne]

........i think that gram can provide the evidence you seek.....

Does his name add weight to the evidence?

[degruch]

........i think that gram can provide the evidence you seek.....

Does his name add weight to the evidence?

Not much.

[InkerSaint]

My basic understanding of these kinds of cases is that they are often tilted towards the worker. That is there's a heavy onus on StK to show reasonable cause for it's actions.

Again - and others may want to correct me - STK would have to have a fairly comprehensive list of reasons for behaving in the way they did.

For starters, a professional sports club is not an ordinary workplace, and professional athletes are not ordinary workers. In fact they may not even be workers at all - they are contractors.

It will be interesting to see whether a professional sports career is considered a "privilege" or a "right".

Player contracts are onerous. There are plenty of players in the system who have undoubtedly breached their contract terms. Only in very rare cases will a club terminate the contract though. However the terms are there to allow a club to protect its interests.

Which is why you don't hear Lovett's team arguing over interpretation of the contract terms.

[markinUSA]

Call me premature, or suggest that I'm making a rash judgment, but I'm starting to get a feeling that recruiting Lovett wasn't a good idea

[matrix]

im just hoping that what im actually thinking doesnt happen.
despite what he is facing and up against i hope he has some support around him in family at least.

[Eastern]

I'm having a little trouble figuring this one out. Does this mean he's not actually contesting his dismissal? It would seem that this claim is somewhat tangential to his sacking. In theory, he could have filed this claim whilst still on the list, couldn't he?

If he doesn't contest his sacking, does that mean we're in the clear RE the salary cap? Or would any potential payout count toward the cap?

It seems that a lot of the legal machinations are just dancing around the elephant in the room.

My take is that the Lawyer, Derek Humphrey-Smith (and his assistant, Samantha Lane) have very little or nothing to hang their hats o on so they are adopting the old DESPERATE LAWYER" approach, otherwise known as the SCATTER-GUN APPROACH !!

[Milan Faletic]

The guy has had a record of allegedly assaulting his girlfriend while he was at Essendon, got picked up in the streets of St Kilda by the police, and has now been charged with rape......

.....and he is suing for being bullied

And that is only what the public has heard about.

Give me a break. All my sympathy for him has gone right out the door.

Does anyone really think the St Kilda Football Club would have gone in to this light heartedly? I am confident that they would have crossed the "t's" and dotted the "i's" before taking such a strong stance. He is toxic for the club and we don't need this disruption. As a human being, I am sad for him but there are rules and I don't hear about anyone else getting in the sort of trouble he has got in to.

...M and M is done and dusted so please don't bring that up.

[meher baba]

If he did what he was charged with doing, I'd like to bully him big time.

[SydneySainter]

I'm no expert and I have no stats to back me up, but from what I've heard, it is a very small percentage of rape charges that actually become convictions. DNA evidence is crucial in a rape trial and if that doesn't exist and it becomes a case of her word against his, often the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Despite the initial decision to recruit Lovett in the first place, the people who run our club aren't fools and wouldn't have given him the chop unless they believed they had they're legal bases covered, as Lovett's team were always going to fight fire with fire. But, seeing as the vast majority of professional athletes walk away from these trials free men, I sure hope the club really have done ALL their homework, because this wont go away anytime soon.

[chook23]

I'm no expert and I have no stats to back me up, but from what I've heard, it is a very small percentage of rape charges that actually become convictions. DNA evidence is crucial in a rape trial and if that doesn't exist and it becomes a case of her word against his, often the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Despite the initial decision to recruit Lovett in the first place, the people who run our club aren't fools and wouldn't have given him the chop unless they believed they had they're legal bases covered, as Lovett's team were always going to fight fire with fire. But, seeing as the vast majority of professional athletes walk away from these trials free men, I sure hope the club really have done ALL their homework, because this wont go away anytime soon.

Why DNA so important here?.

The presence of what I think you are talking about does not support non consent or consent.

Unless he denies ever being in the bedroom

[degruch]

I'm no expert and I have no stats to back me up, but from what I've heard, it is a very small percentage of rape charges that actually become convictions. DNA evidence is crucial in a rape trial and if that doesn't exist and it becomes a case of her word against his, often the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Despite the initial decision to recruit Lovett in the first place, the people who run our club aren't fools and wouldn't have given him the chop unless they believed they had they're legal bases covered, as Lovett's team were always going to fight fire with fire. But, seeing as the vast majority of professional athletes walk away from these trials free men, I sure hope the club really have done ALL their homework, because this wont go away anytime soon.

Why DNA so important here?.

The presence of what I think you are talking about does not support non consent or consent.

Neither matter to the Saints...he was sacked due to his lousy behaviour and failure to meet training targets. Shouldn't be too hard to prove...I assume they'd have forwarded these internally as the best course for sacking him, way prior to the charges being laid.

[older saint]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

[perfectionist]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

As I said earlier, her report was straight. Where's the bias? The damage to her credibility would have been not to do the story once she was aware of it. It is Andrew Lovett (through his lawyers) who has decided to sue, not Sam Lane. This will in no way lock her out of the StKFC. In fact, when someone wants to have a story run without baggage they will, and do, go to her.

[degruch]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

As I said earlier, her report was straight. Where's the bias? The damage to her credibility would have been not to do the story once she was aware of it. It is Andrew Lovett (through his lawyers) who has decided to sue, not Sam Lane. This will in no way lock her out of the StKFC. In fact, when someone wants to have a story run without baggage they will, and do, go to her.

No-one's sued anyone yet...nothing's been filed, it's all gossip and veiled threats. I doubt anything will happen whilst there's a criminal case to be heard first. Sam Lane's just peddling gossip to sell papers...has anyone else reported this?

[Bernard Shakey]

There is only one bully in this whole matter and that is former AFL player Andrew Lovett.

[bigred]

If he did what he was charged with doing, I'd like to bully him big time.

Wont need to.

He will be on the receiving end in prison.

[saintly]

Hope our legal side got it right.

I am convinced that an agreement has been made between the AFL and the Saints that the AFL will cover the costs of our legal action.

The AFL is desperate with the two new clubs coming on line to have a moral differential between us and the bum-sniffers in Rugby League. They will pay to protect the brand.

doubt it!

[stinger]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

As I said earlier, her report was straight. Where's the bias? The damage to her credibility would have been not to do the story once she was aware of it. It is Andrew Lovett (through his lawyers) who has decided to sue, not Sam Lane. This will in no way lock her out of the StKFC. In fact, when someone wants to have a story run without baggage they will, and do, go to her.

No-one's sued anyone yet...nothing's been filed, it's all gossip and veiled threats. I doubt anything will happen whilst there's a criminal case to be heard first. Sam Lane's just peddling gossip to sell papers...has anyone else reported this?

pretty hard to sue someone from a gaol cell....imhfo that is....

[degruch]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

As I said earlier, her report was straight. Where's the bias? The damage to her credibility would have been not to do the story once she was aware of it. It is Andrew Lovett (through his lawyers) who has decided to sue, not Sam Lane. This will in no way lock her out of the StKFC. In fact, when someone wants to have a story run without baggage they will, and do, go to her.

No-one's sued anyone yet...nothing's been filed, it's all gossip and veiled threats. I doubt anything will happen whilst there's a criminal case to be heard first. Sam Lane's just peddling gossip to sell papers...has anyone else reported this?

pretty hard to sue someone from a gaol cell....imhfo that is....

I'm not sure about that...can't tell you from experience, but I'm sure he'll have plenty of time on his hands. My point is, I can't see how any law suit could skirt around the criminal case without one affecting the other.

[stinger]

Obviously Lane sees this as her ticket to credability rather than token female on before the game.

Hope she has as much sympathy for the victim in this ( the girl not Lovett) .

Somehow think she may struggle to get an interview form StKilda for a while now and quite rightly so. I thought Journo's not columists were meant to be impartial?

As I said earlier, her report was straight. Where's the bias? The damage to her credibility would have been not to do the story once she was aware of it. It is Andrew Lovett (through his lawyers) who has decided to sue, not Sam Lane. This will in no way lock her out of the StKFC. In fact, when someone wants to have a story run without baggage they will, and do, go to her.

No-one's sued anyone yet...nothing's been filed, it's all gossip and veiled threats. I doubt anything will happen whilst there's a criminal case to be heard first. Sam Lane's just peddling gossip to sell papers...has anyone else reported this?

pretty hard to sue someone from a gaol cell....imhfo that is....

I'm not sure about that...can't tell you from experience, but I'm sure he'll have plenty of time on his hands. My point is, I can't see how any law suit could skirt around the criminal case without one affecting the other.

take my word for it..they don't normally let you out of gaol so you can swan around in a civil court suing people....

[degruch]

take my word for it..they don't normally let you out of gaol so you can swan around in a civil court suing people....

Would he need to be there? Anyways, I'm sure Civil suits can and have been filed by crims...not saying that he'll definately go to gaol, of course. I just don't reckon it'll get that far whilst there's a criminal case on the cards. It's all bluff and fodder for Sam Lane's article.

[st.byron]

I'm no expert and I have no stats to back me up, but from what I've heard, it is a very small percentage of rape charges that actually become convictions. DNA evidence is crucial in a rape trial and if that doesn't exist and it becomes a case of her word against his, often the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm no expert either but I do have direct personal experience of involvement in a prosecution for sexual assault and unless there is evidence beyond a 'his word against hers' situation, it's very difficult to prosecute.
In the case I was involved in, there were two other witnesses able to corroborate that the incidents and events in question did in fact take place. No DNA or other evidence but two other people with near identical stories. If those witnesses weren't there the perpetrator would never even have been charged. He would have just said, "I didn't do it" and it would have been his word against the victim's. In that scenario it would have been impossible to prove guilt even though I know with absolute certainty that he was as guilty as hell.
So some solid evidence beyond the accusation is imperative, unless of course the accused fesses up.

[Spinner]

Ive been thinking that that very inconvenient 'drunken lock up incident' may well become very convenient.....


In terms of providing a case to sack.....But im no lawyer.

[saintspremiers]

you know until this article came out, i thought that lovett suing, or lovett being sacked would not derail the saints season. but i now believe the opposite. I can't help but now think, that the saints being in the papers and being suied for millions will derail the saints.

unfortunately!

what do you think?

Go ask Rooey saintly.

He will tell you it adds a bushfire in his belly.

It will be a motivating force this season IMO.

[stinger]

Ive been thinking that that very inconvenient 'drunken lock up incident' may well become very convenient.....


In terms of providing a case to sack.....But im no lawyer.

will prove a blessing mate.....