Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
There is a difference between suing her or threatening to sue her. The foolsih girl sounds very vindictive and it doesn't sound like she wants to stop.plugger66 wrote:Yes but Sam doesnt have to sue her. Her life is going downhill quickly and support may be the better way to go. PR is important. Obviously you dont care about it but many do.joffaboy wrote:I disagree with this. The club in conjunction with the undoubted backing on the AFL must take a stand, not just for now but for the future.plugger66 wrote:The club did the right thing by stopping the photos and have been winning the public relations battle but sueing a 17 girl who obviously has huge issues now loses us the public relations battle. The girl was obviously in the wrong but what is the point of sueing her.
It comes across as a huge footy club ganging up against one young girl. Yes I know a few on here say she deserves what she gets but i would rather the club get on the fronty foot and offer her help. She will probably reject it but it will at least make the club look like they are doing the right thing.
If the AFL club was meek and was a victim in this, how many other numbskull slappers will invade the privacy of footballers?
This person is not above the law and should be made an example of to show the generation who have grown up with social networking that there can be consequences for their actions.
She has shown scant regard for Nick Riewoldt, a person she doesn't even know. Her actions have been unlawful by stealing others property, and malicious inthe way she spitefully attempted to destroy a footballers reputation and brand.
Nick Riewoldt said he wouldn't be a victim, and with going in so hard shows he means business.
PR is irrelevant, it is now before the courts and this person has to answer to the laws of our land - end of story.
Yes - but I have two girls around the same age, one 16 and one 18 and neither are as off the rails as this girl.Dr Spaceman wrote:Where the hell are the parents in all of this?
Apparently they're "upset" with her and are not talking to her
Gee, your kid's having her name trashed across the globe, she's being summonsed to court, she's being sued..
Oh that's right, Kim's in that age group where she's too young to be considered an adult but too old to be told what to do!
No wonder society's going downhill quicker than a Nicky Winnar handpass!
The Saints are a football club, not a parenting agency!
For once we are as one. Time to move on and focus on footy, not stoop to new lows. Ganging up on a kid, who obviously has issues (including getting over two miscarriages, which may not have been helped if the father of those babies-apparently Sam Gilbert, from OUR club- abandoned her) is sad and pathetic, Saints. Time for us to grow up, too, by the look of it.plugger66 wrote:The club did the right thing by stopping the photos and have been winning the public relations battle, but suing a 17 girl who obviously has huge issues now loses us the public relations battle. The girl was obviously in the wrong but what is the point of sueing her.
It comes across as a huge footy club ganging up against one young girl. Yes I know a few on here say she deserves what she gets but i would rather the club get on the fronty foot and offer her help. She will probably reject it but it will at least make the club look like they are doing the right thing.
AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:For once we are as one. Time to move on and focus on footy, not stoop to new lows. Ganging up on a kid, who obviously has issues (including getting over two miscarriages, which may not have been helped if the father of those babies-apparently Sam Gilbert, from OUR club- abandoned her) is sad and pathetic, Saints. Time for us to grow up, too, by the look of it.plugger66 wrote:The club did the right thing by stopping the photos and have been winning the public relations battle, but suing a 17 girl who obviously has huge issues now loses us the public relations battle. The girl was obviously in the wrong but what is the point of sueing her.
It comes across as a huge footy club ganging up against one young girl. Yes I know a few on here say she deserves what she gets but i would rather the club get on the fronty foot and offer her help. She will probably reject it but it will at least make the club look like they are doing the right thing.
Dont agree p66.plugger66 wrote:The club did the right thing by stopping the photos and have been winning the public relations battle but sueing a 17 girl who obviously has huge issues now loses us the public relations battle. The girl was obviously in the wrong but what is the point of sueing her.
It comes across as a huge footy club ganging up against one young girl. Yes I know a few on here say she deserves what she gets but i would rather the club get on the fronty foot and offer her help. She will probably reject it but it will at least make the club look like they are doing the right thing.
This.joffaboy wrote:I took the pictures, I never tried to sell them, I have been kicked out by my parents, I have been at hotels with AFL footballers, I have had death threats.
Is there no end to they lying of this trumped up strumpet?
No apparently she is a "child".
Well even children are subject to the laws of the land.
Sue this imbicile slag.
Make her pay big time and make an example of her.
A bit of jail time might bring this idiot to here senses.
Good on you Saints, go in hard and dont stop until you destroy this money grabbing low life slapper.
the "right" to take action may or may not exist, but regardless that doesn't mean it's a good idea. i'm not sure how taking legal action against this girl can possibly help their case in the court of public opinion. just because they're angry doesn't mean they should take it out on her, no matter how much their lawyers think it's a good idea.Spinner wrote:Gilbert Roo Dal Santo and others... As members of society have the right to take action.
I agree 100%. I'm always surprised at how far battered eyelids and a few crocodile tears will take a person.fingers wrote:This.joffaboy wrote:I took the pictures, I never tried to sell them, I have been kicked out by my parents, I have been at hotels with AFL footballers, I have had death threats.
Is there no end to they lying of this trumped up strumpet?
No apparently she is a "child".
Well even children are subject to the laws of the land.
Sue this imbicile slag.
Make her pay big time and make an example of her.
A bit of jail time might bring this idiot to here senses.
Good on you Saints, go in hard and dont stop until you destroy this money grabbing low life slapper.
I'm with you Spinner.Spinner wrote:Dont agree p66.plugger66 wrote:The club did the right thing by stopping the photos and have been winning the public relations battle but sueing a 17 girl who obviously has huge issues now loses us the public relations battle. The girl was obviously in the wrong but what is the point of sueing her.
It comes across as a huge footy club ganging up against one young girl. Yes I know a few on here say she deserves what she gets but i would rather the club get on the fronty foot and offer her help. She will probably reject it but it will at least make the club look like they are doing the right thing.
Gilbert Roo Dal Santo and others... As members of society have the right to take action.
Her intention was to hurt the football club... And Roo & Dal Santo were clearly used as the vehicle.
They deserve the right to take action as individuals. Regardless if it ruins the PR battle for the club.
They should just wait until some sensationalist sections of the media 'purchase' the rights from this malicious 17 year old adn publish 'her account' which if we are to go by her track record may not actually resemble fact?bergholt wrote:the "right" to take action may or may not exist, but regardless that doesn't mean it's a good idea. i'm not sure how taking legal action against this girl can possibly help their case in the court of public opinion. just because they're angry doesn't mean they should take it out on her, no matter how much their lawyers think it's a good idea.Spinner wrote:Gilbert Roo Dal Santo and others... As members of society have the right to take action.
joffaboy wrote:I took the pictures, I never tried to sell them, I have been kicked out by my parents, I have been at hotels with AFL footballers, I have had death threats.
Is there no end to they lying of this trumped up strumpet?
No apparently she is a "child".
Well even children are subject to the laws of the land.
Sue this imbicile slag.
Make her pay big time and make an example of her.
A bit of jail time might bring this idiot to here senses.
Good on you Saints, go in hard and dont stop until you destroy this money grabbing low life slapper.
joffaboy wrote:I took the pictures, I never tried to sell them, I have been kicked out by my parents, I have been at hotels with AFL footballers, I have had death threats.
Is there no end to they lying of this trumped up strumpet?
No apparently she is a "child".
Well even children are subject to the laws of the land.
Sue this imbicile slag.
Make her pay big time and make an example of her.
A bit of jail time might bring this idiot to here senses.
Good on you Saints, go in hard and dont stop until you destroy this money grabbing low life slapper.
Doesn't have to be 18Mr Magic wrote:The minute this 'girl' turns 18 the mainstream media (ie other than social networking media) is free to publish her name and details.
I can see it now.
'Ralph Magazine takes you inside the St Kilda Schoolgirl Sex Scandal'
'Zoo Weekly - Photos of the AFL Sex Schoolgirl'
etc
etc
Everyone knows that boys mature faster than girls ... wait, i might have that the wrong way aroundLegendary wrote:She acts like an adult and wants to be treated like one ... well in the adult world, your actions have consequences.
At her age, thousands of men died for this country in two world wars, and even more came home and dealt with the consequences for the rest of their lives.
Get over this "she's a child" crap. She should face the full force of the law.
I wonder if the choice of posting the photos she did was because Sam looked up to them and once she had some form of retribution she attacked them rather than sam- creating division- part of the plan-Spinner wrote:
Gilbert Roo Dal Santo and others... As members of society have the right to take action.
Her intention was to hurt the football club... And Roo & Dal Santo were clearly used as the vehicle.
They deserve the right to take action as individuals. Regardless if it ruins the PR battle for the club.
this has just been postedsaintharvs wrote:From what I have just read the lawyers for Riewoldt, Dal Santo and Gilbert were unsuccessful in their attempt to have the photos destroyed. However she has been forbidden to post any photos from Gilbert's computer. Mediation in Jan 2011.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/photo ... 1974k.htmlThe teenager at the centre of the St Kilda nude photo scandal has been ordered to destroy images of naked footballers taken from Sam Gilbert’s computer.
A copy of the pictures showing St Kilda captain Nick Reiewoldt and players Nick Del Santo and Zac Dawson in various states of undress will be retained by the federal court as the case between the club and the girl continues.
Justice Shane Marshall today ordered the case to go to mediation. She said she had formed the view that the photos had been taken by Sam Gilbert.
