Five saints called in Lovett case

Legendary · Post: # 970711Post **Legendary** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 3:57pm

3:16 wrote:
chook23 wrote:SEN stating he has been committed to stand trial
Fair enough, would have thought that was a no-brainer, based on events and evidence!!!!!

Hopefully trial date is set down for somewhere around Oct-Nov and it can be all wrapped up before the season next year.

saintsRrising · Wed 11 Aug 2010 3:58pm

MC Gusto wrote:everyone knows who the girl is yea? that email went round a while ago...very interesting. i think i feel sorry for lovett at this stage. it was pretty clear ross wanted him and the players did not.
i dont know whether he is guilty here or not but the girl has a rep

1/ So you are saying that if a female likes sex, that any male can rape her?

2/ I doubt very much that Lyon still wanted him once the facts were known post-Xmas Eve.

plugger66 · Post: # 970715Post **plugger66** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 3:58pm

saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.

I think that may have been because he was just accused of rape. That doesnt mean he wasnt wanted before that.

3:16 · Post: # 970716Post **3:16** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 3:58pm

saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.

Fair enough too, although Mini might want to start getting a few more touches or he might be the same!!!!!

Thinline · Post: # 970717Post **Thinline** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:01pm

3:16 wrote:
chook23 wrote:SEN stating he has been committed to stand trial
Fair enough, would have thought that was a no-brainer, based on events and evidence!!!!!

How so? Drunk people everywhere and he said/she said?

IluvHarvey · Post: # 970718Post **IluvHarvey** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:01pm

3:16 wrote:
saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.
Fair enough too, although Mini might want to start getting a few more touches or he might be the same!!!!!

Is that a joke?

chook23 · Post: # 970720Post **chook23** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:01pm

Was it Sep 9th?

saintsRrising · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:01pm

plugger66 wrote:
saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.
I think that may have been because he was just accused of rape. That doesnt mean he wasnt wanted before that.

I must have missed the part where I said that any player said it earlier.....and yes Mini and the other players all rejected Lovett post his alleged deeds on Xmas Eve.

SainterK · Post: # 970722Post **SainterK** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:02pm

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/lovet ... utostart=1

9th Septmber

Dr Spaceman · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:04pm

saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.

Which is why, IMO, a guilty verdict is not necessary to justify St Kilda's decision to cut him loose.

In saying that I'm not commenting on whether it was legally right, but it was the only viable option.

IluvHarvey · Post: # 970726Post **IluvHarvey** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:04pm

saintsRrising wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
saintsRrising wrote:
IluvHarvey wrote:
And how is it clear that the players didn't want him? Am i missing something?
Well for example Mini's testimony at the hearing was that at the time that he told him (Lovett) that he was no longer welcome at the club.
I think that may have been because he was just accused of rape. That doesnt mean he wasnt wanted before that.
I must have missed the part where I said that any player said it earlier.....and yes Mini and the other players all rejected Lovett post his alleged deeds on Xmas Eve.

You didn't, my comment was to McGusto

bigred · Post: # 970727Post **bigred** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:06pm

Well...I think that answers a few questions.

Banger724 · Post: # 970731Post **Banger724** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:17pm

plugger66 wrote:
MC Gusto wrote:everyone knows who the girl is yea? that email went round a while ago...very interesting. i think i feel sorry for lovett at this stage. it was pretty clear ross wanted him and the players did not.
i dont know whether he is guilty here or not but the girl has a rep
Can I say that is a pathetic thing to say. All of it not just the last bit.

Agree Plugger.

MC - this email you refer to... are you sure you're not confusing this situation with the other incident the club was involved with early this season... ?

Regardless, pathetic thing to say.

MC Gusto · Post: # 970732Post **MC Gusto** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:17pm

dudes relax

all i was saying is i dont think lovett was ever made welcome at the club. i wasnt saying whether he is guilty or not.
also i was saying that the girl is an interesting one - clearly none of you know who she is
anways what ever i not making excuses for this type of behaviour especially if he is guilty.

MC Gusto · Post: # 970736Post **MC Gusto** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:18pm

Banger724 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
MC Gusto wrote:everyone knows who the girl is yea? that email went round a while ago...very interesting. i think i feel sorry for lovett at this stage. it was pretty clear ross wanted him and the players did not.
i dont know whether he is guilty here or not but the girl has a rep
Can I say that is a pathetic thing to say. All of it not just the last bit.
Agree Plugger.

MC - this email you refer to... are you sure you're not confusing this situation with the other incident the club was involved with early this season... ?

Regardless, pathetic thing to say.

quite sure and i dont give a f*** what plugger or anyone else thinks.

saintsRrising · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:20pm

MC Gusto wrote:

also i was saying that the girl is an interesting one - clearly none of you know who she is
.

If you mean about her "liking" AFL players it still is not an excuse for Lovett's actions.

MC Gusto · Post: # 970739Post **MC Gusto** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:23pm

saintsRrising wrote:
MC Gusto wrote:

also i was saying that the girl is an interesting one - clearly none of you know who she is
.
If you mean about her "liking" AFL players it still is not an excuse for Lovett's actions.

lovetts alleged actions

i find it very interesting how this forum got right behind milney - innocent before proven guilty etc etc yet it is plain as day that lovett is guilty according to you blokes

dals_da_bomb · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:25pm

I didnt think anyone knew who she was,

unlike the other incident, where the young girls pictures and name where public knowledge within 48 hours,
almost nothing has been said abouit this lady.

MC Gusto · Post: # 970741Post **MC Gusto** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:27pm

dals_da_bomb wrote:I didnt think anyone knew who she was,

unlike the other incident, where the young girls pictures and name where public knowledge within 48 hours,
almost nothing has been said abouit this lady.

incorrect. people def no he she is. trust me.

dals_da_bomb · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:35pm

so im assuming she is in the spot lights a bit.. I mean a 16 yr olds life was ruined a few months ago with her face and name and private life being thrown around. Everyone had seen her pictures and it all happened very quickly. This time its very hushed.
(NOT THAT I THINK THATS A BAD THING. These kinds of cases are comforting and very hard for everyone involved. Although seems a little strange compaired to what happened not to long ago)

(different agrument, and im off track. sorry for going off topic)

Con Gorozidis · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:36pm

stinger wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
saintbrat wrote:statement above your post con- you must have posted at same time
states they are attending as Civilian Witnesses.
ok. yes. so its only a committal hearing. so court just wants to know basics. i.e was the accused in the vicinity of the crime at the times alleged. thats about it. once they establish basics they go to trial later in the year. committal will probably only last an hour.
no quite...the prosecution has to establish a prima facie case against lovett......

ok. well it only took a day. not 4. basic case in tact.

Thinline · Post: # 970753Post **Thinline** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:38pm

MC Gusto wrote:
saintsRrising wrote:
MC Gusto wrote:

also i was saying that the girl is an interesting one - clearly none of you know who she is
.
If you mean about her "liking" AFL players it still is not an excuse for Lovett's actions.
lovetts alleged actions

i find it very interesting how this forum got right behind milney - innocent before proven guilty etc etc yet it is plain as day that lovett is guilty according to you blokes

I think it will be nigh on impossible to find Lovett guilty at trial and although I'm far from an expert I'm amazed it's going to trial. Drunk girl says A, Drunk bloke says B, no one saw anything beyond aftermath allegations and counter-allegations. But what do I know. Maybe the proof standard isn't as strict as I figured.

That said, to compare Lovett to Milne/Montagna is silly. Vastly different circumstances around the issue of consent.

So who's the girl? We'll know soon enough, I guess. I've never heard so much as a rumour as to who it might be. Head in the sand I guess.

saintspremiers · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:42pm

Children!

Can we all agree on this one point - that Lovett is a flog??

Con Gorozidis · Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:44pm

MC Gusto wrote:
saintsRrising wrote:
MC Gusto wrote:

also i was saying that the girl is an interesting one - clearly none of you know who she is
.
If you mean about her "liking" AFL players it still is not an excuse for Lovett's actions.
lovetts alleged actions

i find it very interesting how this forum got right behind milney - innocent before proven guilty etc etc yet it is plain as day that lovett is guilty according to you blokes

well it was an action. cos lovett not disputing it happened. hes arguing it was consensual.

but yeah saints fans should beware hypocrisy cos the alleged events are not a world away from the alleged events in the millne case.

still annoys me how the media refer to him as "st kilda midfielder".

ace · Post: # 970756Post **ace** » Wed 11 Aug 2010 4:45pm

MC Gusto wrote:everyone knows who the girl is yea? that email went round a while ago...very interesting. i think i feel sorry for lovett at this stage. it was pretty clear ross wanted him and the players did not.
i dont know whether he is guilty here or not but the girl has a rep

So they both had form not just Lovett.