Court case

dragit · Post: # 1108368Post **dragit** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 3:04pm

Con Gorozidis wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/star-b ... 1112824939

How you don't get jail time for that is beyond me, what a freaking scary bastardâ€¦

stinger · Post: # 1108371Post **stinger** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 3:13pm

you're link doesn;t work..but here's the story...

the real worry from a st kilda point of view....is how the f*** did we come to draft him...

Star bashed me

FOOTBALLER Andrew Lovett's ex-girlfriend claims she feared she would die as he held her hostage and bashed her.

Kimberlie Watson alleges the Essendon forward locked her in his car and hit her on the head and body in a fit of rage that left her bruised and with a bloodied ear.

The receptionist and promotions model complained to police she was dragged by the hair into Lovett's blue Monaro and belted repeatedly as he drove through an industrial area in a frightening 45-minute ordeal.

Ms Watson, 24, told the Herald Sun she was scared she would be killed after ending their 10-month relationship.

"I didn't think I was going to get out of the car alive," she said.

"I could see the evil in his eyes. He wanted to hurt me."

Ms Watson was granted an intervention order against Lovett in court last April. He did not contest the making of the order and the assault allegations were not tested.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

The Herald Sun informed both Lovett's manager and Essendon Football Club of Ms Watson's allegations.

In their combined response late yesterday, Lovett said: "I deeply regret the incident which led to the making of the order.

"I have told Kim how remorseful I am and, whilst I can't take back what happened, I would like to publicly apologise for any grief I have caused Kim and her family.

"I will continue to put steps in place to address these personal issues."

Lovett, 24, faced Melbourne Magistrates' Court this week accused of breaching the intervention order by approaching Ms Watson in a city bar as she celebrated her birthday on September 24.

The case was adjourned to next month.

Ms Watson told the Herald Sun Lovett bombarded her with 180 text messages for two months after their tumultuous breakup on February 4 last year.

In one, he allegedly said he was a "special person" who "could probably get away with murder".

Ms Watson said she did not want to destroy Lovett's career but hoped he would face his problems.

"I don't want to hurt Andrew or get any kind of revenge.

"I don't want him to be sacked. I just don't want him to do it to anyone else."

Essendon managing director Peter Jackson said the club was most concerned about the alleged incident and immediately set up counselling and wide-ranging sanctions for their young star last year.

"Andrew has some significant personal issues he is working through," Mr Jackson said.

"These problems have contributed to the current situation but are in no way offered as an excuse.

"He needs to sort his life out and redeem himself and we believe he has a better chance of achieving this through the structure and support that Essendon Football Club can provide.

"We will continue to assist him in the hope that in time he can fully redeem himself and get his life in order.

"Andrew is under no illusion that any further behaviour such as this will be tolerated."

He said Ms Watson had declined club offers of assistance.

Ms Watson said she feared Lovett did not understand the gravity of his behaviour. She was sickened when he said during an interview last year that the matter was "blown out of proportion".

Lovett said in the same interview he had been battling depression after a series of tragic events, including the death of his father.

Ms Watson urged the football world and the public to treat violence against women seriously.

She said she had agonised about speaking out, but did so in the hope she could inspire courage in other women and help prevent them from suffering.

"I don't need sympathy. I don't want people to feel sorry for me," she said. "I don't hate Andrew and I don't want other people to hate Andrew.

"I want people to realise that this situation happens ... whether it's a footballer or anyone else from any walk of life."

stinger · Post: # 1108373Post **stinger** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 3:18pm

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/rape- ... 1ho44.html

"Mr Tovey said it was â€œwildly illogicalâ€

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1108381Post **GrumpyOne** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 3:37pm

[quote="stinger"]http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/rape- ... 1ho44.html

"Mr Tovey said it was â€œwildly illogicalâ€

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1108383Post **GrumpyOne** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 3:38pm

stinger wrote:you're link doesn;t work..but here's the story...

the real worry from a st kilda point of view....is how the f*** did we come to draft him...

Star bashed me

FOOTBALLER Andrew Lovett's ex-girlfriend claims she feared she would die as he held her hostage and bashed her.

Kimberlie Watson alleges the Essendon forward locked her in his car and hit her on the head and body in a fit of rage that left her bruised and with a bloodied ear.

The receptionist and promotions model complained to police she was dragged by the hair into Lovett's blue Monaro and belted repeatedly as he drove through an industrial area in a frightening 45-minute ordeal.

Ms Watson, 24, told the Herald Sun she was scared she would be killed after ending their 10-month relationship.

"I didn't think I was going to get out of the car alive," she said.

"I could see the evil in his eyes. He wanted to hurt me."

Ms Watson was granted an intervention order against Lovett in court last April. He did not contest the making of the order and the assault allegations were not tested.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

The Herald Sun informed both Lovett's manager and Essendon Football Club of Ms Watson's allegations.

In their combined response late yesterday, Lovett said: "I deeply regret the incident which led to the making of the order.

"I have told Kim how remorseful I am and, whilst I can't take back what happened, I would like to publicly apologise for any grief I have caused Kim and her family.

"I will continue to put steps in place to address these personal issues."

Lovett, 24, faced Melbourne Magistrates' Court this week accused of breaching the intervention order by approaching Ms Watson in a city bar as she celebrated her birthday on September 24.

The case was adjourned to next month.

Ms Watson told the Herald Sun Lovett bombarded her with 180 text messages for two months after their tumultuous breakup on February 4 last year.

In one, he allegedly said he was a "special person" who "could probably get away with murder".

Ms Watson said she did not want to destroy Lovett's career but hoped he would face his problems.

"I don't want to hurt Andrew or get any kind of revenge.

"I don't want him to be sacked. I just don't want him to do it to anyone else."

Essendon managing director Peter Jackson said the club was most concerned about the alleged incident and immediately set up counselling and wide-ranging sanctions for their young star last year.

"Andrew has some significant personal issues he is working through," Mr Jackson said.

"These problems have contributed to the current situation but are in no way offered as an excuse.

"He needs to sort his life out and redeem himself and we believe he has a better chance of achieving this through the structure and support that Essendon Football Club can provide.

"We will continue to assist him in the hope that in time he can fully redeem himself and get his life in order.

"Andrew is under no illusion that any further behaviour such as this will be tolerated."

He said Ms Watson had declined club offers of assistance.

Ms Watson said she feared Lovett did not understand the gravity of his behaviour. She was sickened when he said during an interview last year that the matter was "blown out of proportion".

Lovett said in the same interview he had been battling depression after a series of tragic events, including the death of his father.

Ms Watson urged the football world and the public to treat violence against women seriously.

She said she had agonised about speaking out, but did so in the hope she could inspire courage in other women and help prevent them from suffering.

"I don't need sympathy. I don't want people to feel sorry for me," she said. "I don't hate Andrew and I don't want other people to hate Andrew.

"I want people to realise that this situation happens ... whether it's a footballer or anyone else from any walk of life."

Damning if admissable.

Con Gorozidis · Wed 20 Jul 2011 5:33pm

well lovett cant plead good character. if he tries the pros have the right to bring up this old story. and BANG!

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1108421Post **GrumpyOne** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 5:35pm

You can see why he elected not to take the stand.

saintspremiers · Wed 20 Jul 2011 5:42pm

Lovett = sub-species.

He is a nothing.

Moods · Post: # 1108487Post **Moods** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 8:43pm

stinger wrote:i had a friend on a jury in a sexual assault case in which i had earlier had some pre-trial involvement...the guy was a teacher who had been having intercourse with his 11 year old step daughter...they acquitted him...some months later ,when i found out my friend had been on that jury, i asked her why they had done so, and hence had allowed a child molester to go back teaching young girls....she, nor surprisingly, got more than a bit upset and stated that there was no evidence of penetration, and said that if it had been her daughter, she would have had her medically examined....

my reply was... don't you think the police had arranged for that to happen..???..of course they had....parts of the doctor's evidence was ruled inadmissible in the committal proceedings after deals were done to reduce the charges to several counts of indecent assault...huge parts of his statement were blacked out....later the defendant changed his plea in the higher court...but the medical evidence didn't get back in for the jury to consider...

..not often the jury gets the full story..

..i'm not cynical.....nor am i lacking in common sense ....i'm a realist....

and i do know how the system works and the reasoning behind it....if some flower wants to take a pot shot at me for that...i couldn't give a rats....

knowing how the system works is not the same as saying that the system does actually work either....

I had a mate sit on a jury as well. It was a rape trial. He was the foreman on the jury. His gut suspicion was that the bloke was guilty as sin, but was staggered at the lack of evidence put fwd by the prosecution. In the end he said they had no choice but to find not guilty, even though he found out 12 months later the same guy was before the courts for the same thing.

Further investigation into his trial revealed that half the evidence by the police had been knocked out at committal for various reasons.

Certainly pays to get a good barrister in this state the way our judicial system works.....

skeptic · Post: # 1108513Post **skeptic** » Wed 20 Jul 2011 10:07pm

Con Gorozidis wrote:Big issue for me is the issue of kissing. If there were several minutes of kissing he walks. But if she awoke to find him on top hes gone.

can't agree

consenting to kissing is different to consenting to sex

she could have felt him up at the club andstill not wanted to have sex with him

Bernard Shakey · Wed 20 Jul 2011 11:03pm

Con Gorozidis wrote:Big issue for me is the issue of kissing. If there were several minutes of kissing he walks. But if she awoke to find him on top hes gone.

Are you really trying to say several minutes of kissing is a green light? What sort of a backwater do you live in?

bobmurray · Wed 20 Jul 2011 11:19pm

Bernard Shakey wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:Big issue for me is the issue of kissing. If there were several minutes of kissing he walks. But if she awoke to find him on top hes gone.
Are you really trying to say several minutes of kissing is a green light? What sort of a backwater do you live in?

he's been conned

Con Gorozidis · Thu 21 Jul 2011 12:32am

Bernard Shakey wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:Big issue for me is the issue of kissing. If there were several minutes of kissing he walks. But if she awoke to find him on top hes gone.
Are you really trying to say several minutes of kissing is a green light? What sort of a backwater do you live in?

no i dont think that at all. im talking about the evidence provided in this case and the idea of consent and perceived consent. it certainly has an impact yes. im saying was in this case there may have been a period of consent.
her evidence is she woke and he was on her. so bang hes gone.
and no kissing isnt a green light. what im saying it would show her story wasnt quite right. thats all. anyway no evidence of kissing and he didnt take the stand so hes gone.

GrumpyOne · Thu 21 Jul 2011 10:43am

Con Gorozidis wrote:her evidence is she woke and he was on her. so bang hes gone.

And people complain about the phrases I used in this thread.

Dr Spaceman · Thu 21 Jul 2011 10:59am

GrumpyOne wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:her evidence is she woke and he was on her. so bang hes gone.
And people complain about the phrases I used in this thread.

Players aren't the only ones who can suffer a dose of poor form.

Maybe some posters could do with a spell at zebrasational

philtee · Post: # 1108697Post **philtee** » Thu 21 Jul 2011 6:30pm

"Jury retires in Andrew Lovett rape case"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/jury-r ... 6099185852

Spinner · Post: # 1108706Post **Spinner** » Thu 21 Jul 2011 6:55pm

Con Gorozidis wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:Big issue for me is the issue of kissing. If there were several minutes of kissing he walks. But if she awoke to find him on top hes gone.
Are you really trying to say several minutes of kissing is a green light? What sort of a backwater do you live in?
no i dont think that at all. im talking about the evidence provided in this case and the idea of consent and perceived consent. it certainly has an impact yes. im saying was in this case there may have been a period of consent.
her evidence is she woke and he was on her. so bang hes gone.
and no kissing isnt a green light. what im saying it would show her story wasnt quite right. thats all. anyway no evidence of kissing and he didnt take the stand so hes gone.

Knew exactly what you meant.

Geez people take any opportunity to high horse themselves.

skeptic · Post: # 1109030Post **skeptic** » Fri 22 Jul 2011 6:41pm

sorry Con

my mistake

ausfatcat · Post: # 1110526Post **ausfatcat** » Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:12pm

And the verdict is:

NOT GUILTY

source = heraldscum

SainterK · Post: # 1110527Post **SainterK** » Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:13pm

Not guilty

Animal Enclosure · Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:15pm

Cue the 'Why did we sack him' threads... maybe throw in a 'it's Ross' fault, if we had kept him we'd have won the flag'.

A big difference between not guilty & innocence

SainterK · Post: # 1110534Post **SainterK** » Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:21pm

Club is going to cop a bit of heat about unfair dismissal and all that, but I'm confident all will be fine.

The drunk and disorderly, turning up in an unfit state to training, breaking the rule that had him required to call football manager if he found himself in trouble again.

BTW, that annoying SEN matt thompson is loving this

I am going to make no judgement on the case itself, just hope all involved have some peace and can move on with their lives as best as can be hoped.

Dr Spaceman · Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:26pm

Animal Enclosure wrote:Cue the 'Why did we sack him' threads... maybe throw in a 'it's Ross' fault, if we had kept him we'd have won the flag'.

A big difference between not guilty & innocence

Well of course. A bloke who misses training, comes last in Time Trials and is on bail for Rape would have done wonders for us in our 2010 campaign

Verdict is irrelevant as far as our footy club is concerned. The right decision was made.

tony74 · Post: # 1110538Post **tony74** » Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:29pm

Dr Spaceman wrote:
Animal Enclosure wrote:Cue the 'Why did we sack him' threads... maybe throw in a 'it's Ross' fault, if we had kept him we'd have won the flag'.

A big difference between not guilty & innocence
Well of course. A bloke who misses training, comes last in Time Trials and is on bail for Rape would have done wonders for us in our 2010 campaign

Verdict is irrelevant as far as our footy club is concerned. The right decision was made.

Totally agree with the good Doctor.

GrumpyOne · Post: # 1110539Post **GrumpyOne** » Mon 25 Jul 2011 3:29pm

Dr Spaceman wrote:
Animal Enclosure wrote:Cue the 'Why did we sack him' threads... maybe throw in a 'it's Ross' fault, if we had kept him we'd have won the flag'.

A big difference between not guilty & innocence
Well of course. A bloke who misses training, comes last in Time Trials and is on bail for Rape would have done wonders for us in our 2010 campaign

Verdict is irrelevant as far as our footy club is concerned. The right decision was made.

If it had just been because he was accused of rape, it was the wrong decision. But other factors came into consideration. One wonders how many of those other factors would stand up to scrutiny today.