Channel 9 News...

bigred · Post: # 944744Post **bigred** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:22pm

Allianz
harvey Norman
the eagles :p

I am so over this s***

Solar · Post: # 944745Post **Solar** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:24pm

rodgerfox wrote:I think the actual story is big news. Obviously it's just one dudes word against others - but the story of 'police corruption' is a big story.

The problem with it, is that they've clearly burnt Milne, Montagna in the process.

Apart from the 'Channel 9 aren't suggesting Milne and Montagna are guilty' line, it deadset fried them both.

agree

the club and players DID NOTHING WRONG

yet I would guess 90% of the images were of the club and players.

I know it would be hard but can the club sue them?

saint75 · Post: # 944746Post **saint75** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:25pm

rodgerfox wrote:I think the actual story is big news. Obviously it's just one dudes word against others - but the story of 'police corruption' is a big story.

The problem with it, is that they've clearly burnt Milne, Montagna in the process.

Apart from the 'Channel 9 aren't suggesting Milne and Montagna are guilty' line, it deadset fried them both.

Didn't really attack Joey at all. Only Milne.

Interesting, wonder if Mick the Liar had a hand in this!

The investigation continued through it's process despite perceived 'pressure' to drop it. They had no evidence to support the claims - case was dropped - end of story.

Seriously though, as though police corruption is anything new. This is actually quite mild to some of the incidents that have been relayed to me via a friend high up in the force.

Milan Faletic · Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:25pm

Kate wrote:Claims the club sabbotaged the investigation.

That was never alleged or said on the report.

clarky449 · Post: # 944748Post **clarky449** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:26pm

I feel sorry for Milne, his kids must go through crap

Quixote · Post: # 944749Post **Quixote** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:26pm

* Detective (no longer in the force) who was involved (in charge?) of the case has come forward, claiming:

pressure from within the force to drop the case from 'passionate Saints man', plus others; implied documents were temporarily stolen in order to provide information to the Club; implied he would be looked after by the Club should he drop case; stated the carriage of justice was not what it should have been.

I got the feeling though all these things were happening very early doors in the proceedings. In the week after the accusations. Then, the story skips forward to 8 weeks later and the Saints boys a re cleared. Surely during this time, the carriage of justice was exercised???

WTF is with this story? And a follow-up tomorrow night? It seems strange, quite strange.....

The was plenty of supposition within the story - plenty of encouragement for the audience to add 1 and 1 and get 4.

When stumbling around the missing documents points (said they were missing for 'up to hours'....), their was a clumsy inference of the Club obtaining the females involved details (surely would have them already??) and further to this - inference of hush hush arrangements.

I just find it all a bit... strange. Surely, this detective by suggesting that the carriage of justice was not followed, is essentially saying he didn't do his job properly?? He's at no stage said - I was paid off. The girls were paid off. It's all just misty suggestions.

What is this guys agenda?? Surely people can see what he's saying is actually... doesn't really make sense?? "The operation I was head of was very badly policed".

Again though - surely all this was over 6 years ago?

If people are going to bring it all back up - it is only right the mitigating LACK OF EVIDENCE TO PROSECUTE is also brought back up again, too.

ozrulestrace · Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:27pm

Did they give the name of the ex detective?

is this Eddies way of trying to back up Mick Mathouse's allegation?
By saying "we told you so"

SainterK · Post: # 944756Post **SainterK** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:32pm

Tim McMillian (the reporter) just rang SEN and basically filled them in again.

fingers · Post: # 944757Post **fingers** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:32pm

I am so sick of muckraking crap that CH9 (and others) dish up. Fine - police corruption story? Fair enough....why drag the player pics all over it?

Same with the story a few weeks ago - no mention of the collingwood player.

While I'm at it. Tracy Grimshaw and that shyte called A Current Affair can burn in hell for the crap that they dish up. They pay for stories and push them out like they're doing us a favour.

Weak journalism. It's everything that's bad about journalism and nothing that's good.

saint66au · Post: # 944759Post **saint66au** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:34pm

"The operation I was head of was very badly policed".

So, as head of the operation, he had the opportunity to blow the whistle on this 6 years ago. Hmm bit scared of losing his own job perhaps, seeing that if it was "very badly policed" the buck would stop with him
But now he's retired...so he rings one of his media contacts and tells him he has a story?

ozrulestrace · Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:34pm

I've just listened to the Channel 9 reporter on SEN.

Doesn't seem to be pointing the finger at the club but his fellow officers who contacted him at Brighton CIU to put a bit of pressure to get rid of the case.

FYI the Channel 9 man is wrong that the OPI was in existence at the time so he couldn't take his issues to an independent authority.

The Ombudsman was around at the time plus Victoria Police has internal areas to deal with this kind of matter.

Maybe the member has sat and brooded about this for 6 years and waited until he left to let go.

Mr Magic · Post: # 944761Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:35pm

ozrulestrace wrote:Did they give the name of the ex detective?

is this Eddies way of trying to back up Mick Mathouse's allegation?
By saying "we told you so"

Scott Gladman as reported by SEN

WHich is now leading it's Sports News with the story.

According to the police detective, another policeman, a Saints supporter, tried to stop him from investigating.

Quixote · Post: # 944764Post **Quixote** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:38pm

saint66au wrote:
"The operation I was head of was very badly policed".
So, as head of the operation, he had the opportunity to blow the whistle on this 6 years ago. Hmm bit scared of losing his own job perhaps, seeing that if it was "very badly policed" the buck would stop with him
But now he's retired...so he rings one of his media contacts and tells him he has a story?

If there is anything in it - which I doubt - this bloke is agenda driven and his comments are self-implicating at the very least.

Why - now?

Why is he no longer in the force?

Is he short of a buck???

saint1974 · Post: # 944767Post **saint1974** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:42pm

Just rang channel 9 and voiced my complaint on the gutter journalism,told them if the EX police officer had a problem with the way the investigation was handled he should have followed correct procedure,not come out 6 years later.
Did ask if he was paid for story didnt know Iwas polite as the young lady is only the receptionist.
My son is in the force and I know for a fact they are taught and reinforced that if they are unhappy with the way an investigation is being handled there are strict procedured to follow.
Channel9 and Herald Sun gutter journalism no more support for either of you.

Milan Faletic · Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:48pm

Quixote wrote:
saint66au wrote:
"The operation I was head of was very badly policed".
So, as head of the operation, he had the opportunity to blow the whistle on this 6 years ago. Hmm bit scared of losing his own job perhaps, seeing that if it was "very badly policed" the buck would stop with him
But now he's retired...so he rings one of his media contacts and tells him he has a story?

If there is anything in it - which I doubt - this bloke is agenda driven and his comments are self-implicating at the very least.

Why - now?

Why is he no longer in the force?

Is he short of a buck???

That was my thought too. Why now?

Why on a relative slow footy news week?

Why 6 years later?

Why on the week on the biggest game of the year?

Did he get paid for the story?

markp · Post: # 944781Post **markp** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:54pm

Would be interesting to know if he is a supporter of any team in particular too.

I have a feeling this will backfire on channel 9.

GrumpyOne · Post: # 944782Post **GrumpyOne** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:55pm

Milan Faletic wrote:
Quixote wrote:
saint66au wrote:
"The operation I was head of was very badly policed".
So, as head of the operation, he had the opportunity to blow the whistle on this 6 years ago. Hmm bit scared of losing his own job perhaps, seeing that if it was "very badly policed" the buck would stop with him
But now he's retired...so he rings one of his media contacts and tells him he has a story?

If there is anything in it - which I doubt - this bloke is agenda driven and his comments are self-implicating at the very least.

Why - now?

Why is he no longer in the force?

Is he short of a buck???
That was my thought too. Why now?

Why on a relative slow footy news week?

Why 6 years later?

Why on the week on the biggest game of the year?

Did he get paid for the story?

Be interested to know under what circumstances he left the force.

Some thing is not what it seems with the man.

SainterK · Post: # 944788Post **SainterK** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:58pm

markp wrote:
I have a feeling this will backfire on channel 9.

I have a feeling as well, let's make it so

Solar · Post: # 944789Post **Solar** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:59pm

I also encourage people to let the club know that you are supporting them in this attack.

Quixote · Post: # 944790Post **Quixote** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 7:59pm

This story simply reeks, it is so soaked in reekingness that reek himself is right now ROSES.

Thinline · Post: # 944791Post **Thinline** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 8:04pm

Like even the worst fart, the stench will soon dissipate.

Non story.

No one else is running it.

Don't worry.

saint66au · Post: # 944793Post **saint66au** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 8:07pm

Thinline wrote:Like even the worst fart, the stench will soon dissipate.

Non story.

No one else is running it.

Don't worry.

Exactly...not even that flagship of all things beat-up, the Herald Sun, has it anywhere on their website

Says it all really

supersaints · Mon 21 Jun 2010 8:09pm

I'm totaly p....d off. I guess Edjob didn't like it that Malthead was forced to apologise, guess its his way of getting back at Milney... its disgusting
Wonder what team the ex cophead barracks for...

kosifantutti23 · Mon 21 Jun 2010 8:15pm

Mr Magic wrote:
ozrulestrace wrote:Did they give the name of the ex detective?

is this Eddies way of trying to back up Mick Mathouse's allegation?
By saying "we told you so"
Scott Gladman as reported by SEN

WHich is now leading it's Sports News with the story.

According to the police detective, another policeman, a Saints supporter, tried to stop him from investigating.

Didn't his brother Rodney play for us?

SainterK · Post: # 944798Post **SainterK** » Mon 21 Jun 2010 8:17pm

saint66au wrote:
Thinline wrote:Like even the worst fart, the stench will soon dissipate.

Non story.

No one else is running it.

Don't worry.
Exactly...not even that flagship of all things beat-up, the Herald Sun, has it anywhere on their website

Says it all really

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/st-kil ... 5882432318