Lovett interviewed by Police

[Moods]

THe players have a massive input into everything else that goes on at the footy club, I can't see this being any different.

IN theory, yes, it would be nice if the players could just detach themselves from the situation and get on with playing footy.

IN reality do ppl honestly believe we are ANY chance this year if there is a fracture in the playing group? And IF there is, what are the chances that Lovett could possibly be expected to play half decent footy w/o the support of team mates he has known for all of 10 minutes, let alone cope with the pressure that comes with being a minor celebrity in the middle of a media circus which is focussed on a rape case?

Honestly does everyone think that Lovett will just shrug this off and go out and play great footy? THis isn't a drink drive case, these are allegations about as serious as can be levelled at a bloke. If the playing group, even a key few players have decided that they don't support Lovett and won't support him then the decision has already been for the club as far as I'm concerned.

First thing Lovett has to do is try and clear his reputation - forget about footy for now. Once he has convinced ppl he cares about that he is innocent and has won their trust back, then worry about playing footy.

Ppl keep bringing up the Milne/Montagna case. If I recall correctly one of the first things that happened is that both players had to firstly convince GT they were innocent. Once this was done there was no suspension and the club backed the players to the hilt despite ongoing investigations into their actions.

The opposite has happened in this case, which doesn't strike me as a good omen. Footy clubs are notorious for protecting their best assets (the players) and for the club to immediately stand him down suggests that either they don't believe his story, or that poss other players have already had an imput into what's happened......

[Mr Magic]

The opposite has happened in this case, which doesn't strike me as a good omen. Footy clubs are notorious for protecting their best assets (the players) and for the club to immediately stand him down suggests that either they don't believe his story, or that poss other players have already had an imput into what's happened......

Or that times have changed since the Milne/Montagna case.
Society no longer accepts Footy Clubs seemingly ignoring everything and backing their players to the hilt.

I'm not suggesting you're wrong in your take on this, but I don't think any of us know what thinking went into the Club's decision to suspend Lovett indefinitely.
My own opinion is that they've taken heed of the Adelaide actions on Bock and the Melbourne Storm actions on Ingliss, both physical assaults on females (no rape allegations).

As an aside, other than the original stories, has the word 'rape' been used or only 'assault'. If so, I'm wondering if the initial stories went 'too far' and the media outlets have tried to 'dial it back' a little since?

[I Love Peter Kiel]

Some very good points made here, Moods and Mr Magic.

Happy to see this thread has gone beyond the cheap point-scoring we saw about halfway through.

Somebody mentioned the Sunday Age? I hate to call anyone a flog, but people like Cam$ron No&kes.......he seems to have something against GT. Can somebody tell him he's not our coach anymore? As for Caroline "Bl&*dy" W#lson...
Sometimes journalists do err on the side of sensationalism. Remember Hutchie mistakenly named Koz in the 2004 incident?

If what has been alleged this time around is true, then these are extremely serious charges.

I am still optimistic that this will blow over and Andrew will be a regular player for us this year. His pace and brilliance is the "X-Factor" that we need.

But whatever happens, the club will survive. I have complete confidence that the present administration, coach and leadership group will make the right decisions for the club.

[I Love Peter Kiel]

Of course I meant "can s.o. tell C. No%kes that GT isn't our coach anymore"!

[plugger66]

The players will have a huge imput to what happens to Lovett and so they should. It is likely that a certain player has a better idea than anybody apart from Lovett as to what happened. if there is even the slightest doubt of guilt he will not play for us and so he shouldnt.

[chook23]

The players will have a huge imput to what happens to Lovett and so they should. It is likely that a certain player has a better idea than anybody apart from Lovett as to what happened. if there is even the slightest doubt of guilt he will not play for us and so he shouldnt.

I am pressuming by doubt you meam chance........

if the same applied in 2004..............??

[Eastern]

The players will have a huge imput to what happens to Lovett and so they should. It is likely that a certain player has a better idea than anybody apart from Lovett as to what happened. if there is even the slightest doubt of guilt he will not play for us and so he shouldnt.

Exactly (and I hope everyone understands your "if").

I think I read somewhere that the players and staff are back tomorrow (Wednesday) and I'm pretty sure that this topic will be on the agenda for the footy department's first meeting. Having said that, the club has a bit of time on it's side and I wouldn't expect any decision to be made public just yet !!

[Ghost Like]

Do any of those with a legal/police background find it interesting/strange that he would be driven to the interview by his high powered QC and not have him in on the interview with him (as was reported)?

Or would the QC have been there in case charges were laid then and there?

From my limited knowledge MM, your second question is closer to the money, in case charges were laid and the possibility that a remand application was made by the police. He would have been there to argue for bail.

I believe, (& Stinger would know this better than I), that if his lawyer had sat in on the interview it would have excused him from representing him in court. I think because in effect it makes him a witness in the case.

Am I right Stinger or way off the mark?

[borderbarry]

It would only apply if the interview went against the suspect, ie, admissions. I have had Solicitors sit in on interviews and later represent the suspect.

[GrumpyOne]

Do any of those with a legal/police background find it interesting/strange that he would be driven to the interview by his high powered QC and not have him in on the interview with him (as was reported)?

Or would the QC have been there in case charges were laid then and there?

From my limited knowledge MM, your second question is closer to the money, in case charges were laid and the possibility that a remand application was made by the police. He would have been there to argue for bail.

I believe, (& Stinger would know this better than I), that if his lawyer had sat in on the interview it would have excused him from representing him in court. I think because in effect it makes him a witness in the case.

Am I right Stinger or way off the mark?

Check this with St Fid, but I believe that Borderbarry (above) is spot on.

[GrumpyOne]

Everybody seems to be assuming that the playing group will not back Lovett.

Do we know this for a fact?

What happened on all these Lovett threads to the presumption of innocence till proven guilty?

This type of accusation could be alledged against any sexually active player who enjoys a good party. That's about 75% of our list. I think the majority of the playing group will be secretly thanking their own Gods that it hasn't happened to them. So I am inclined to think that unless they have evidence that hasn't been publically released, they will back him to play.

[Milton66]

Everybody seems to be assuming that the playing group will not back Lovett.

Do we know this for a fact?

What happened on all these Lovett threads to the presumption of innocence till proven guilty?

This type of accusation could be alledged against any sexually active player who enjoys a good party. That's about 75% of our list. I think the majority of the playing group will be secretly thanking their own Gods that it hasn't happened to them. So I am inclined to think that unless they have evidence that hasn't been publically released, they will back him to play.

Interesting point GO.

There are so many variables at play.

I'm going to stick my chin out here, but most people appear to hung Lovett already.

Posters have talked about the victim (girl) involved... yet no one knows who she is or what she's like. And I'm not taking a sexist angle or condoning anything.

I used to work with some girls who simply loved getting it on with fotty palyers. One with Barker and the other with Roberts... way back then.

So really knows what the preceeding evening entailed, or what the conversation between the 2 was... or what signals were sent.

Now I'm not saying that this was the case. Maybe AL had a few too many and saw an opportunity so to speak.

Too many variables. If it turns out to be a nasty spat, then why wouldn't the players back AL?

[GrumpyOne]

Everybody seems to be assuming that the playing group will not back Lovett.

Do we know this for a fact?

What happened on all these Lovett threads to the presumption of innocence till proven guilty?

This type of accusation could be alledged against any sexually active player who enjoys a good party. That's about 75% of our list. I think the majority of the playing group will be secretly thanking their own Gods that it hasn't happened to them. So I am inclined to think that unless they have evidence that hasn't been publically released, they will back him to play.

Interesting point GO.

There are so many variables at play.

I'm going to stick my chin out here, but most people appear to hung Lovett already.

Posters have talked about the victim (girl) involved... yet no one knows who she is or what she's like. And I'm not taking a sexist angle or condoning anything.

I used to work with some girls who simply loved getting it on with fotty palyers. One with Barker and the other with Roberts... way back then.

So really knows what the preceeding evening entailed, or what the conversation between the 2 was... or what signals were sent.

Now I'm not saying that this was the case. Maybe AL had a few too many and saw an opportunity so to speak.

Too many variables. If it turns out to be a nasty spat, then why wouldn't the players back AL?

Exactly Milt.

Lovett might not have worn the tricolour in anger yet, but at the very least deserves the presumption of innocence from us at this point in time.

[matrix]

what im wondering is why is it taking so long?
or is this how long stuff takes to get sorted?

legal system is certainly not something i know too well about...but what happens now?
do the people involved wait for court?
or do the cops just take statements and then make a decision based on proof?.

id want this sorted out no matter the outcome...if i was either party

[GrumpyOne]

what im wondering is why is it taking so long?
or is this how long stuff takes to get sorted?

legal system is certainly not something i know too well about...but what happens now?
do the people involved wait for court?
or do the cops just take statements and then make a decision based on proof?.

id want this sorted out no matter the outcome...if i was either party

We have become so used to American crime dramas on TV that appear to have the crime, detection, arrest and trial all occuring within a matter of days.

Any formal court process could be between 12 - 24 months away.

Imagine if you couldn't raise bail, and you were locked up that long and eventually found innocent.

Crap legal system.

[markp]

what im wondering is why is it taking so long?
or is this how long stuff takes to get sorted?

legal system is certainly not something i know too well about...but what happens now?
do the people involved wait for court?
or do the cops just take statements and then make a decision based on proof?.

id want this sorted out no matter the outcome...if i was either party

We have become so used to American crime dramas on TV that appear to have the crime, detection, arrest and trial all occuring within a matter of days.

Any formal court process could be between 12 - 24 months away.

Imagine if you couldn't raise bail, and you were locked up that long and eventually found innocent.

Crap legal system.

You'd just hate to have that sort of thing looming for so long... as matrix points out, if you were either party.

[matrix]

dunno GO, dont watch much telly to be honest (as in serial shows anyway)

i mean 12 months away???

if person A is innocent then they are walking around with that kinda s*** over their head, and copping all sorts from people.
if person A is guilty then im sure person B would want it sorted and to be able to get on with their life.
it just seems nuts that it could take up to 2 years?

crazy stuff
so guilty or innocent, if it takes at a minimum of a year,...is the bloke going to play or what?.
club is in a bastard of a possie imo.
rumors of other players not wanting to play with said accused etc.
gonna be interesting

[markp]

dunno GO, dont watch much telly to be honest (as in serial shows anyway)

i mean 12 months away???

if person A is innocent then they are walking around with that kinda s*** over their head, and copping all sorts from people.
if person A is guilty then im sure person B would want it sorted and to be able to get on with their life.
it just seems nuts that it could take up to 2 years?

crazy stuff
so guilty or innocent, if it takes at a minimum of a year,...is the bloke going to play or what?.
club is in a bastard of a possie imo.
rumors of other players not wanting to play with said accused etc.
gonna be interesting

Maybe in some cases the long time spent waiting and the stress involved makes some people crack and fess up to the truth?

I know in the past the police have gotten suspects in missing person/murder cases to give press conferences and observe them as they plea for information on their missing loved ones.

[aussiejones]

The support Andrew Lovett thread was locked. Amounts to we dont want to discuss any form of support for the guy.

Yes the majority seem to have him guilty . Now just remember we know very little about the latest incident. What we do know is details of past incidents , and that is what is colouring the current anti Lovett views.
True the latest allegation is serious and not a one off . Yes he has a bad record . Are we also forgetting many other AFL players that have been bad and have been re accepted into their club or another club. Many many bad things have been done by a great many players , often after suspension and the dust has settled down they return .

What if he is innocent ? Have we considered that ?

Time for a fair go and lets get over our disappointment . The club needs to decide soon as to wait on the Courts will take months and may well be a long way off.

[matrix]

wtf do you do??
sit in the house for 12 months and order food thru coles home delivery

what a f****** mess for the club, this bloke should be training the house down and looking to big gards as inspiration ffs.

well im calling it
tipping he wont play for us this year.
what a waste if so.

edit:
im not saying either person is innocent or guilty as i have no idea of the situation...but just stating its a f***ed one and the club will be royally farked off i reckon

[joffaboy]

The support Andrew Lovett thread was locked. Amounts to we dont want to discuss any form of support for the guy.

Yes the majority seem to have him guilty . Now just remember we know very little about the latest incident. What we do know is details of past incidents , and that is what is colouring the current anti Lovett views.
True the latest allegation is serious and not a one off . Yes he has a bad record . Are we also forgetting many other AFL players that have been bad and have been re accepted into their club or another club. Many many bad things have been done by a great many players , often after suspension and the dust has settled down they return .

What if he is innocent ? Have we considered that ?

Time for a fair go and lets get over our disappointment . The club needs to decide soon as to wait on the Courts will take months and may well be a long way off.

The other thread was locked because it decended into the usual pissing contest between some posters and completely went off the rails.

This one has stayed OT. Apart from that you post is pretty fair and reasonable IMHO.

[undecided]

This thread is getting out of control. Too many long posts that I can't be bothered reading lol.

[stinger]

Do any of those with a legal/police background find it interesting/strange that he would be driven to the interview by his high powered QC and not have him in on the interview with him (as was reported)?

Or would the QC have been there in case charges were laid then and there?

From my limited knowledge MM, your second question is closer to the money, in case charges were laid and the possibility that a remand application was made by the police. He would have been there to argue for bail.

I believe, (& Stinger would know this better than I), that if his lawyer had sat in on the interview it would have excused him from representing him in court. I think because in effect it makes him a witness in the case.



way off the mark...covered by legal professional privilege.....



Am I right Stinger or way off the mark?

i understand from the stories in the papers that the cops interviewed lovett without grace being present...if that were true i would find it difficult to understand......

...i always believed in the old saying ....."those that don't talk......walk"

[stinger]

It would only apply if the interview went against the suspect, ie, admissions. I have had Solicitors sit in on interviews and later represent the suspect.

depends what is said.....and what they want to do afterwards.....if it is a plea .....after admissions ....there is no problem......what a barrister can't do is claim his client didn't do the crime if admissions have been made to him......that's the reason you never ask a client wishing to plead not guilty on the grounds that he is innocent...whether he did it,,,the crime...or not......whole different ball game in murder cases....there, insanity...self defence, provocation...come into it....

[satchmo]

if the same applied in 2004..............??

I believe it did. From what I know of the incident, I would be sure that the players had the Clubs and their team mates full support.

In fact I'm quite surprised that 11s name even gets mentioned.