Lovett interviewed by Police

Maxstar22 · Post: # 869065Post **Maxstar22** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:32pm

Again, we are just going around and around in circles. Until the full facts come out, what can we do? Speculate, in fight, make stupid comments??

Personally, I still am not 100% sure on how I feel or think about this situation. I am upset, disaapointed, confused and all that, however he still is innocent at the mo, isn't he?

Many years ago, a friend of mine was accused of the very same thing. I won't go into specifics, but in the end it was proven that nothing happened and the girl made it up. While I am in no way saying that this is the case here, let's just wait for all the facts before we hang and quarter him.

markp · Post: # 869070Post **markp** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:40pm

Maxstar22 wrote:Until the full facts come out, what can we do? Speculate, in fight, make stupid comments??

Sounds about right to me...

I think whether he plays or not in the interim, and even perhaps if exonerated, will come down to the players.

What a mess.

StSteven · Post: # 869072Post **StSteven** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:42pm

Spinner wrote:
ausfatcat wrote:
plugger66 wrote:My guess is the other player in the house knows exactly what happened so it will be mainly in his hands. Dont like his chances though.
Was he watching was he? Otherwise he wouldn't know, unless it didn't happen the player can back up that but he couldn't say if it did happen unless he was watching.

Agreed.

Don't agree.....

Other player and partner could hear objections, scuffling etc etc.....let's just leave it to those who know the details.

This is not going to be nice for anyone.

CaptainRiewoldt · Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:50pm

I understand we shouldnt be speculating but the quicker we sack him get on with business the better. Oh we arent going to though are we?? oMG SERIOUSLY with lovett it will spiral down very quickly.

saintspremiers · Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:52pm

Well I feel much more confident he will play with us this year now, due to the fact we've sent the heavies in (David Grace).

IF the club seriously were already jack of Lovett, they wouldn't have put this much effort (and expense) into the case.

IMO the club desperately wants Lovett to play, and will do all possible to make it happen.

Maxstar22 · Post: # 869076Post **Maxstar22** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 9:56pm

CaptainRiewoldt wrote:I understand we shouldnt be speculating but the quicker we sack him get on with business the better. Oh we arent going to though are we?? oMG SERIOUSLY with lovett it will spiral down very quickly.

That doesn't even make sense

In one breath you are saying we shouldn't speculate and then in the other you want him sacked?? If you aren't speculating, how can you want him sacked?? Sacked for what?

Until it is proven he has done something wrong, how can you sack him?

If it is proven he has done something wrong, then yes, by all means sack him and do whatever else you want to a proven rapist. But until then, don't speculate and make rash statements until you know the full facts.

zebraman · Post: # 869078Post **zebraman** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:00pm

If he's charged and found guilty...then it's the end of Lovett...he faces whatever punishment the law hands down on him.....and the girl in question should receive compensation

If he's not charged then he should be back training asap...and the girl in question should then face the music over the allegations...

To the top · Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:00pm

Remember Lindy Chamberlain?

The case that saved the debt ridden Murdoch media at the time.

News Corp had her guilty on "body language" - a "body language" they backed up with the (selective) photographs of her that they published accross their front pages day after day.

And she did not break down and cry in public, so she must be guilty!

"She looks so hard, she must be guilty"

No doubt some on here subscribe to the same method of "justice" as does Murdoch's grubby media.

How Rohan Rivett must turn in his grave.

Well, eventually, all charges against Chamberlain were withdrawn and compensation was paid.

So much for "body language" and the media in search of a story.

It is an interesting comparative that 2 males have been arrested and charged with rape over an incident after an evening at a Geelong Nightclub 10 days ago.

What that says is that the DPP views that Victoria Police have a case they can prosecute on the evidence - not that they are always successful as several high profile matters confirm.

All we know at this stage is what Victoria Police say and what the Club say.

You can speculate all you want.

Lovett (and his representatives) have said nothing and they are in no way obliged to.

At this stage the suspension of Lovett is "indefinite" - and whilst the position maintains in that charges have not been laid, "indefinite" will need to be reviewed by the Club - in the interests of all parties.

No doubt Affidavit has been attended, because one of the first steps when allegations are made is for Affidavit to be sworn for any future reliance if the allegations lead to prosecution.

This Affidavit will, no doubt, be in the hands of those representing Lovett.

There may then be a further Affidavit addressing the specific allegations of the woman, once those allegations (in Affidavit?) are known to Lovett and his representatives.

And Victoria Police will have their records of interview - records which may well differ significantly from each other.

saintsRrising · Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:22pm

saintspremiers wrote:Well I feel much more confident he will play with us this year now, due to the fact we've sent the heavies in (David Grace).

IF the club seriously were already jack of Lovett, they wouldn't have put this much effort (and expense) into the case.

IMO the club desperately wants Lovett to play, and will do all possible to make it happen.

Not necessarily so.

The saints will also been keen to minimise any damage to St Kilda, and remember too that there was also another St Kilda player involoved. So two good reasons in themselves for the saints to ensure that Lovett is well represented.

Bernard Shakey · Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:23pm

saintspremiers wrote:Well I feel much more confident he will play with us this year now, due to the fact we've sent the heavies in (David Grace).

IF the club seriously were already jack of Lovett, they wouldn't have put this much effort (and expense) into the case.

IMO the club desperately wants Lovett to play, and will do all possible to make it happen.

Who's "we"?

Do you really think St Kilda Football Club is paying for his defence?

If that's the case I and many others will not be renewing our memberships.

stinger · Post: # 869092Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:28pm

Quixote wrote:
Eastern wrote:3AW News said that Lovett was interviewed and released "pending a summons application". If this means what I think it means, and the ABC report suggests, then Lovett will be charged on summons as soon as the case is reviewed. The reports also say that this could take months.
If the Police are applying for a summons, it means they think he's got something to answer to. And they'll get it.

Don't think it'll take that long either - collate evidence, give to Court.

From my limited knowledge, about a fortnight.

Stinger should know more, but I think he's off surfing with hot young chicks

yep...fascinated with pink....

stinger · Post: # 869097Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:38pm

To the top wrote:Remember Lindy Chamberlain?

And she did not break down and cry in public, so she must be guilty!

...she actually did you know...but the press didn't like her....believed she was guilty so edited what went before the public....i have seen the unedited tapes....shown to me and a group of senior lawyers by her barrister no less.........arr...the stories i could tell......

saint66au · Post: # 869102Post **saint66au** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:42pm

CaptainRiewoldt wrote:JESUS CHRIST!! Its 1998 ALL over again. Stan Alves all that crap now we have Lovett and all his crap!!

We might make the finals but like 1998 will fade BIG TIME!! and what happened in 1999 and 2000?? OMG!! well thats just great. Thypical of stkilda to have a great team and throw it away and off field issues!!

You really need to take a big deep breath and a bit of a think before you post....your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

chook23 · Post: # 869103Post **chook23** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:42pm

plugger66 wrote:
ausfatcat wrote:
plugger66 wrote:My guess is the other player in the house knows exactly what happened so it will be mainly in his hands. Dont like his chances though.
Was he watching was he? Otherwise he wouldn't know, unless it didn't happen the player can back up that but he couldn't say if it did happen.
I doubt he was watching but unless he is poor reader of body language I think he would have a very good idea. Afterall he would have seen both Lovett and the girl after the event. I still say he would know.

Hate you to be on a jury.........

stinger · Post: # 869105Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:46pm

saint66au wrote:your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

pricks ears......what was the post on swallow about....????..got a reference...

edited....nar...don;t bother ...just seen it...

santazzi · Post: # 869106Post **santazzi** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:46pm

Wow how consuming this business has been to all of us. Upto now I have resisted to joinn the fray so to speak...but now I have to join because I have two very legall oriented questions which I hope forumites who are legal practitioners will help answer (I am led to believe Stinger is one)

1. In legal terms what exactly "...released pending summons application" mean?

2. If Andrew is either not charged or charged but not found guilty for what ever reason, what legal basis does our club has to terminate his contract?

Maxstar22 · Post: # 869107Post **Maxstar22** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:47pm

saint66au wrote:
CaptainRiewoldt wrote:JESUS CHRIST!! Its 1998 ALL over again. Stan Alves all that crap now we have Lovett and all his crap!!

We might make the finals but like 1998 will fade BIG TIME!! and what happened in 1999 and 2000?? OMG!! well thats just great. Thypical of stkilda to have a great team and throw it away and off field issues!!
You really need to take a big deep breath and a bit of a think before you post....your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

I take offence that someone who has the nic CaptainRiewoldt can post such claptrap. Isn't that taking Nick's name in vain or something??

ausfatcat · Post: # 869108Post **ausfatcat** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:47pm

StSteven wrote:
Don't agree.....

Other player and partner could hear objections, scuffling etc etc.....let's just leave it to those who know the details.

This is not going to be nice for anyone.

Was this reported if so where, or the player told you or their partner please elaborate.......

matrix · Post: # 869109Post **matrix** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:49pm

stinger wrote:
saint66au wrote:your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

pricks ears......what was the post on swallow about....????..got a reference...

http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... hp?t=58971

stinger · Post: # 869110Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:49pm

santazzi wrote:Wow how consuming this business has been to all of us. Upto now I have resisted to joinn the fray so to speak...but now I have to join because I have two very legall oriented questions which I hope forumites who are legal practitioners will help answer (I am led to believe Stinger is one)

1. In legal terms what exactly "...released pending summons application" mean?

they didn't arrest and charge him....

stinger · Post: # 869111Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:52pm

swallow should have been a sainter.....got overlooked by us after we gave him a jumper....he would be a better option than some of our recent signings ffs....

ausfatcat · Post: # 869112Post **ausfatcat** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:54pm

stinger wrote:swallow should have been a sainter.....got overlooked by us after we gave him a jumper....he would be a better option than some of our recent signings ffs....

hmmm the only player we tok before him in that draft was Gilbert.

chook23 · Post: # 869113Post **chook23** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:54pm

CaptainRiewoldt wrote:I tell you this we are in a dificult position... HE WILL NOT BE CHARGED!!!

How can he be??? No Witnesses his word vs hers. All she is claiming is he assaulted her in HER SLEEP?? So she was semi unconcious??? The defence would have a field DAY!!

There is no doubt he is guilty and is scum and should be sacked BUT if he gets off the chasrges which he will how do we and what do we base of termination from?? And does that mean he will be paid out?? FFS we have been given Hell right now. He should pay the money back if he was decent at ALL!

The players hate him dont want him there so we cant have him there...

Plenty of presumptions!!

stinger · Post: # 869114Post **stinger** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 10:55pm

ausfatcat wrote:
stinger wrote:swallow should have been a sainter.....got overlooked by us after we gave him a jumper....he would be a better option than some of our recent signings ffs....
hmmm the only player we tok before him in that draft was Gilbert.

year before i believe....

Spinner · Post: # 869116Post **Spinner** » Wed 30 Dec 2009 11:07pm

saint66au wrote:
CaptainRiewoldt wrote:JESUS CHRIST!! Its 1998 ALL over again. Stan Alves all that crap now we have Lovett and all his crap!!

We might make the finals but like 1998 will fade BIG TIME!! and what happened in 1999 and 2000?? OMG!! well thats just great. Thypical of stkilda to have a great team and throw it away and off field issues!!
You really need to take a big deep breath and a bit of a think before you post....your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

Agreed.

Pissed off that thread is locked - No chance to respond, and detail how much of an idiot the original poster is.