Why would the club? Twist in Andrew Lovett row

[saint75]

I seem to remember way back in the early days of this sad saga, that the Club said the alleged rape had nothing to do with the sacking.

The actual rape may not have been, but there 'may have' been other actions by Lovett that night that were against club rules and this young lady may have been a witness to it. We know for a fact that he was drinking excessively. We know from past history that Lovett loses complete control when he drinks (just ask anyone from Essendon). Heaven only knows what else he got up to that night!

AL has continually protested his innocence, yet was sacked by the club without being able to mount a defence to the charge. Unfair dismissal in anyone's book.

When and where? I have never heard him speak about this publicly.

The club has been forced to play dirty pool in this matter, forced on it by the ill-conceived sacking of AL, which was in turn forced upon it by the alleged victim's relationship with a player.

The result is a grab for money by AL, not entirely expected, and the club's determination to use every dirty legal trick in the book to avoid it.

Both sides will come out of this with manure on their boots.

You have to be kidding! Do you seriously believe for one moment that the 'alleged' rape was the only reason for the sacking of Lovett? I think you will find that it was the final straw, but not the only one. All of Lovetts actions during his very brief stint at our club have been deplorable. Missing training sessions, he was picked up by the police at the front of his house when he was passed out drunk and they are but 2 examples. Lovett would have had clauses in his contract re his behavior.

Bottom line is this: Lovett was given a second chance and he screwed it up (before you get you knickers in a not grumpy, I am not only referring to the pending rape charges but his behavior full stop). To continually make him out to be a white-haired angel is getting very old. He has PROVEN to have significant issues with alcohol. It was PROVEN that he was not towing the line at St Kilda. He was given his second and final chance by RL after he was picked up by the police late last year. He was missing training sessions and was not towing the company line, therefore he was terminated.

You are quick to point out that AL has a right to be innocent untill proven guilty. Not sure why you are unable to offer the same courtesy to the St Kilda FC.

[degruch]

AL has continually protested his innocence, yet was sacked by the club without being able to mount a defence to the charge. Unfair dismissal in anyone's book.

How long was he suspended for? How long did the police investigation go for?? Was he down at the pub during this time??? If he wan't preparing defense during this time he's such a c**k sure tosser he deserves to be dumped.

[GrumpyOne]

The actual rape may not have been, but there 'may have' been other actions by Lovett that night that were against club rules and this young lady may have been a witness to it.

Reports are that there was more than one player on the Saints list there when the incident occurred. Would not need to call on this young lady to qualify ""öther actions"". She would have been called for one purpose only.

When and where? I have never heard him speak about this publicly.

Anybody accused of such a crime would be well advised to let their lawyer do the talking for them. The statement has been made through his lawyer.

Missing training sessions, he was picked up by the police at the front of his house when he was passed out drunk and they are but 2 examples.

He was not passed out, but was inside his home when the police called regarding excessive noise. He argued with them, they ""invited"" him outside to discuss it, then they arrested him for being drunk in a public place. A tactic used too often by police when confronted by an indigenous person. Get the facts before you comment.

Lovett would have had clauses in his contract re his behavior.

Then sack him for that, not for some unproved accusation.

To continually make him out to be a white-haired angel is getting very old.

Why a white-haired angel? Is black an evil colour to you?

He has PROVEN to have significant issues with alcohol. It was PROVEN that he was not towing the line at St Kilda. He was given his second and final chance by RL after he was picked up by the police late last year. He was missing training sessions and was not towing the company line, therefore he was terminated.

Then terminate him for that. If that was the case, there would be no need to use the rape charge as a reason.

You are quick to point out that AL has a right to be innocent untill proven guilty. Not sure why you are unable to offer the same courtesy to the St Kilda FC.

Is the Club facing legal charges? I don't think so.

[GrumpyOne]

AL has continually protested his innocence, yet was sacked by the club without being able to mount a defence to the charge. Unfair dismissal in anyone's book.

How long was he suspended for? How long did the police investigation go for?? Was he down at the pub during this time??? If he wan't preparing defense during this time he's such a c**k sure tosser he deserves to be dumped.

By the sound of your post you know the answers. Enlighten us.

[ace]

It's only right and proper that this matter should be dealt with after the trial, as the club wants... and if that happens you would think there would be no reason for the girl to give evidence. But if it was to be dealt with before the trial, then obviously she may need to.

It's a no-brainer... after the trial is surely what will happen.

Oh no! Not a no-brainer.
When ever have the courts done something because it was a sensible no-brainer.

[saint75]

The actual rape may not have been, but there 'may have' been other actions by Lovett that night that were against club rules and this young lady may have been a witness to it.

Reports are that there was more than one player on the Saints list there when the incident occurred. Would not need to call on this young lady to qualify ""öther actions"". She would have been called for one purpose only.

When and where? I have never heard him speak about this publicly.

Anybody accused of such a crime would be well advised to let their lawyer do the talking for them. The statement has been made through his lawyer.

His lawyers are sending him broke at the moment. At the rate he is going, he won't have anyone representing him by the time the actual criminal trial comes about.

Missing training sessions, he was picked up by the police at the front of his house when he was passed out drunk and they are but 2 examples.

He was not passed out, but was inside his home when the police called regarding excessive noise. He argued with them, they ""invited"" him outside to discuss it, then they arrested him for being drunk in a public place. A tactic used too often by police when confronted by an indigenous person. Get the facts before you comment.

So you have the facts on this incident do you? Funny how you seem to have facts on one incident then are completely ignorant on the other. Are you now saying the police, St Kilda and the AFL are at fault and AL is completely innocent? Pull your head out of the clouds.

Lovett would have had clauses in his contract re his behavior.

Then sack him for that, not for some unproved accusation.

He has been. What occurred that night is a small part of a bigger picture.

To continually make him out to be a white-haired angel is getting very old.

Why a white-haired angel? Is black an evil colour to you?

These comments sicken me. White-haired angel is quite a common saying. My comments have NOTHING to do with the colour of his skin. My comments have to do with his 'alleged' SICKENING actions against a female and his proven record of bad behaviour over his entire career including his short period with our club. You seem to lay the blame for his actions on everyone else but him. You conveniently make excuses when he is proven to be in the wrong and then to try and pull yourself out of a hole by using the race card. FFS, GROW UP!!! I have been pretty tolerant of your snide comments in the other thread on this topic but these comments are slanderous. Try and come up with something original will you.

He has PROVEN to have significant issues with alcohol. It was PROVEN that he was not towing the line at St Kilda. He was given his second and final chance by RL after he was picked up by the police late last year. He was missing training sessions and was not towing the company line, therefore he was terminated.

Then terminate him for that. If that was the case, there would be no need to use the rape charge as a reason.

See above, sick of typing the same thing over.

You are quick to point out that AL has a right to be innocent untill proven guilty. Not sure why you are unable to offer the same courtesy to the St Kilda FC.

Is the Club facing legal charges? I don't think so.

Did the St Kilda football club lay criminal charges against Lovett? No. So how is that relevant? My comments were made in reference to your continual bagging of the club and they way they have handled the situation. You claim to know facts about some of the issues and then not others, but you still claim that Lovett is the one that has been wronged. Why can you not extend them the same courtesy that you do to Lovett? Maybe, just maybe they are in a much better situation to judge what is the best way to proceed than what you are.

[GrumpyOne]

So you have the facts on this incident do you? .

Actually I do. He was with family on that night. He was not with family on the night of the alleged rape. I only can presume from what I have heard 3rd and 4th hand about that second night, so I don't claim it as fact.

White-haired angel is quite a common saying.

Not one I have ever encountered in the last 50 years. Still an interesting expression however.

you still claim that Lovett is the one that has been wronged.

If St Kilda say that they are going to call the alleged rape victim to give evidence at an AFL Tribunal about AL's dismissal, then the dismissal is all about the alleged rape. If it was about misconduct, there are several Saints players who were with him on the night who could give damning evidence about any misconduct.
The primary aim of a football club is to win premierships. When the leadership group says its him or us, the club will choose the leadership group every time. Fairness, justice and presumption of innocence go out the window. Simple as that.
I hope Lovett is found guilty, as the outcome for the Club if he is found innocent is going to be devastating.

[saint75]

So you have the facts on this incident do you? .

Actually I do. He was with family on that night. He was not with family on the night of the alleged rape. I only can presume from what I have heard 3rd and 4th hand about that second night, so I don't claim it as fact.

Interesting, seems you know quite a few facts of ONE side of the case.

White-haired angel is quite a common saying.

Not one I have ever encountered in the last 50 years. Still an interesting expression however.

You can claim it is 'interesting' as much as you want, just don't make vague references that my disgust for Lovett has anything to do with the colour of his skin.

you still claim that Lovett is the one that has been wronged.

If St Kilda say that they are going to call the alleged rape victim to give evidence at an AFL Tribunal about AL's dismissal, then the dismissal is all about the alleged rape. If it was about misconduct, there are several Saints players who were with him on the night who could give damning evidence about any misconduct.

You don't class this as serious misconduct..?? As you know so much about the Lovett side of things, surely you of all people know that there were incidents prior to this.

The primary aim of a football club is to win premierships. When the leadership group says its him or us, the club will choose the leadership group every time. Fairness, justice and presumption of innocence go out the window. Simple as that.

Begs the question as to why a group would take such a strong stance doesn't it? Especially considering there were a 'couple' of them present on the night of the 'alleged' incident.

There are not many decent people that I know of who would tolerate or want to be around a person they believe is capable of such a crime.

I hope Lovett is found guilty, as the outcome for the Club if he is found innocent is going to be devastating.

I don't 'hope' that Lovett is found guilty to spare the club any heartache. I want him to be found guilty if a jury of his peers deems the evidence compiled against him is sufficient enough to prove him guilty beyond reasonable doubt (which I 'believe' will be the case, but has yet to be proven). I am not so much worried about the impact on the club as I am about the 'alleged' violence towards the young woman involved.

Only time will tell how this one will play out. Rape cases are notoriously difficult to prove. The club will not be devastated if he is found innocent, they will just have to pay him out. End of story and they move on. Wonder if it would be as easy for the young girl involved to put this whole incident behind her.

[bozza1980]

AL has continually protested his innocence, yet was sacked by the club without being able to mount a defence to the charge. Unfair dismissal in anyone's book.

No.

It may be in your book but not necessarily in a legal sense.

The club (or employer in a similar case) only needs to have a reasonable belief of Lovett's (or any employee's) guilt.

To lose your job the proof of guilt is completely different to that required to lose your freedom.

Whether other people think it wrong or despite any noise Lovett's legal team make, an employer has the right to choose who they employ. Regardless of whether 12 jurors find him guilty, an employer who has reasonable belief of the persons guilt has the right to dismiss.

Beyond this, "Bringing the game or club into disrepute" is a dismissable offence within the AFLPA Bargaining agreement, I'm yet to hear an argument that can put forward a reasonable case that being charged with rape does not bring the club or game into disrepute.

[bozza1980]

I hope Lovett is found guilty, as the outcome for the Club if he is found innocent is going to be devastating.

This is not entirely correct.

Being found not guilty in a court of law can mean, but does not always mean that the accused is innocent. Not Guilty means that the case was not proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

For the club's decision to sack him to be unlawful it must be proven unreasonable to believe his guilt in relation to the crime. Hard to do when Vic Police and DPP are confident of a convicition.

At the end of the day his legal team are engaged to get the best possible outcome for their client and that is what they are endeavouring to do. However at the end of the day, unless their is a miscarriage of justice, it will be found that the dismissal was lawful.

[ozrulestrace]

Grumpy One, I'm not even going to use your quote because that would give you some kind of satisfaction in seeing some absolute rubbish comment being repeated again and again.

STOP looking for conspiracy theories. There are none.

The only ones that are going to have manure on their feet are DH-S & Asssociates who are going to leave AL bankrupt and and will have walked away from him when the funds have run out.

Go back to the start and refer to the actions of one particular individual and the ramifications first in the criminal system and then in the civil system (if it gets that far) and stop blaming everybody else.

[degruch]

AL has continually protested his innocence, yet was sacked by the club without being able to mount a defence to the charge. Unfair dismissal in anyone's book.

How long was he suspended for? How long did the police investigation go for?? Was he down at the pub during this time??? If he wan't preparing defense during this time he's such a c**k sure tosser he deserves to be dumped.

By the sound of your post you know the answers. Enlighten us.

I could enlighten the entire forum by calling you a knob...but it's hardly a secret. If you're going to defend this idiot, at least try and make some kind of sense.

[GrumpyOne]

I hope Lovett is found guilty, as the outcome for the Club if he is found innocent is going to be devastating.

This is not entirely correct.

Being found not guilty in a court of law can mean, but does not always mean that the accused is innocent. Not Guilty means that the case was not proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

For the club's decision to sack him to be unlawful it must be proven unreasonable to believe his guilt in relation to the crime. Hard to do when Vic Police and DPP are confident of a convicition.

At the end of the day his legal team are engaged to get the best possible outcome for their client and that is what they are endeavouring to do. However at the end of the day, unless their is a miscarriage of justice, it will be found that the dismissal was lawful.

The big test will be the committal hearing in August.

If there is found to be insufficient evidence for him to stand trial, all sorts of legal hell will descend on the Club.

For the reason you state above, less hell will result from him being found not guilty at trial. It will only cost the club a couple of mill plus legals to pay him off.

[Kate]

I doubt the club would be able to bring evidence from the alleged rape victim into the unfair dissmissal case if she hasn't approached the club and made a compliant.

I'm impressed by the decisive way the club has handled the matter. Would people be happier if we'd used the Carlton solution and given her a lot of money to shut up and go away?

[GrumpyOne]

I could enlighten the entire forum by calling you a knob...but it's hardly a secret. If you're going to defend this idiot, at least try and make some kind of sense.

Go right ahead, its not going to phase me. Nothing I haven't been called before and to my face.

Lets get this straight. I do not like the man. IMHFO he is an arrogant pr1ck with too much inclination for booze and other character altering substances. I have talked to relatives of his on occasions, but not since the alleged rape. I also abhor crimes against women. If he is found guilty, and a line forms to p1ss on him afterwards, I will fight tooth and nail to be at the front of the queue.

But I was brought up with a belief in justice, and being innocent until proven guilty. Too many on here have tried him, found him guilty, and suggested his sentence without knowing his side of the story.

I also know how easy it is to suffer post-coital regret and yell the rape word. I have empathy for the young girl and the situation she is in, and disagree with the club using her plight to offload a troublemaker. Whether she was raped or not, she will be suffering.

But Lovett, although not in the same category, deserves the same treatment as mass-murderers such as John Wayne Gacey, David Berkowicz and Ivan Milat.... the chance to defend themselves before a jury of their peers before being determined guilty.

[Kate]

But Lovett, although not in the same category, deserves the same treatment as mass-murderers such as John Wayne Gacey, David Berkowicz and Ivan Milat.... the chance to defend themselves before a jury of their peers before being determined guilty.

Hip, Hip Hooray to the OPP for making sure that he doesn't wriggle out of having that chance.

[GrumpyOne]

But Lovett, although not in the same category, deserves the same treatment as mass-murderers such as John Wayne Gacey, David Berkowicz and Ivan Milat.... the chance to defend themselves before a jury of their peers before being determined guilty.

Hip, Hip Hooray to the OPP for making sure that he doesn't wriggle out of having that chance.

Agreed Kate.