There was no women raped - detective

[Timmah]

I'm not debating the moving of it. While it will quell discussion due to decreased exposure, it was the right thing to do. I'm talking about El Diablo's lazy moderation.

I can see what's been going on in this thread - a dickhead avoiding facts and a lazy mod deleting factual posts that don't suit his viewpoint. Simple as that.

 

[El Diablo]

dodge, you're an idiot

someone posted a local rumour which i deleted. furry quoted it so i had to delete that. every response to that was then deleted as it all came back to the rumour.

 

[Willow]

Timmer... you're way out of line. Do what any sane person would do in your place. Go away, find a pub, and hoe in.

Good night.

 

[Willow]

P.S. This thread will be unlocked in the morning.

 

[gaterooze]

According to the Talkin' Sports interview, half the investigation team believed the woman should have been charged with wasting police time. I think that's a pretty clear indication of what the "evidence" was.

 

[Cammo]

According to the Talkin' Sports interview, half the investigation team believed the woman should have been charged with wasting police time. I think that's a pretty clear indication of what the "evidence" was.

If it was true that there was no rape then I believe she should be charged. Falsely claiming a rape can be harmful to the real cases out there that aren't being reported.

While not as bad as the act of rape itself, a false claim if it can be proven should result in a hefty charge in my opinion.

 

[Timmah]

*returns from pub*.

El Diablo is still a wanker ;-)

 

[El Diablo]

 

[Timmah]

Thanks love :hitit:

 

[nqboy]

I would have loved to be there for this fight but my computer was in the shop and I went on holidays just before it broke Actually, I've been working out bush with only view access on the forum.

McEvoy's story is a point in the Dogs favour but by no means a major or conclusive one. He fails to address his motivation for the story, his disafeection and resignation from the coppers. And it still doesn't cover why the Bulldogs would refuse to answer questions if they did nothing wrong.

I heard one version of it through backchannels. It was fairly damning of the Dogs (= multiple counts of rape) but I can't speak for the reliability of the sources.

Like everyone else on here, I'm guessing and my guess remains unchanged, that serious criminal offences were committed on the night by Dogs players.

 

[Timmah]

And what have you got to back a viewpoint of guilty til proven innocent?

Sounds like you're relying on rumour and hearsay to me...

 

[ibeme]

McEvoy's story is a point in the Dogs favour but by no means a major or conclusive one. He fails to address his motivation for the story, his disafeection and resignation from the coppers. And it still doesn't cover why the Bulldogs would refuse to answer questions if they did nothing wrong.

You should read the transcript of the radio interview here (post #39):

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=140107&page=3

It explains that the club was very helpful, and the players were being led by their legal representation.

And they did answer the questions in the end. Independent witnesses supported their version of events. That's something that you can't ignore.

I heard one version of it through backchannels. It was fairly damning of the Dogs (= multiple counts of rape) but I can't speak for the reliability of the sources.

And we all heard the police incident statement that was read out by Ray Hadley, which was later changed due to it's innaccuracy. We also read that the girl required stiches, which was later described as a complete fabrication by the police. To base your opinion on rumours rather than evidence is pretty dumb.

Like everyone else on here, I'm guessing and my guess remains unchanged, that serious criminal offences were committed on the night by Dogs players.

Your guess is based on bullsh*t. The facts are that the evidence simply did not support the claims. The girl lied about a number of things, whereas the players version of events were supported by evidence and independant witnesses. It was broad daylight in the pool area, where hotel units overlook unobstructed, and near which a kiosk was opening for the day. You can ignore all of this because you want it to be true, but fortunately the police and the DPP can't.

 

[bulldog]

And what have you got to back a viewpoint of guilty til proven innocent?

Sounds like you're relying on rumour and hearsay to me...

You don't need anything to back your view when you're "guessing", but you sure as hell should have something more than a guess if you're going to accuse someone of such a disgusting act.

 

[ibeme]

Here's another post that explains the circumstances and reasons why no charges were laid:

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?p=2353349#post2353349

 

[nqboy]

Okay, I've waded through the transcript and it appears the investigators suffered unreasonable outside interference from their superiors (in rank only apparently) and inside interference from leaks.

McEvoy's statement certainly helps the Dgos' position but anyone who thinks something terrible and, in all probability, criminal is kidding themselves IMO. The bit I can't get past is why these blokes refused to answer questions fully and frankly and in a timely manner, i.e. immediately. Anyone who fails to do that usually has something to hide and I don't grant such people the presumption of innocence.

The reason for my attitude is that I reckon the criminal justice system is already slanted far too much in the bad guys favour. "Better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man convicted..." and all that. So the guilty hide behind the checks and balances put in to protect the innocent, e.g. the right to silence (another concept I don't agree with).

And it's not that I am anti-Dogs, despite all the problems that have come from their quarter. I am against any suggestion of criminals using the law to hide behind and that's what this looks like.

So we'll have to agree to differ on this one.

 

[ibeme]

McEvoy's statement certainly helps the Dgos' position but anyone who thinks something terrible and, in all probability, criminal is kidding themselves IMO. The bit I can't get past is why these blokes refused to answer questions fully and frankly and in a timely manner, i.e. immediately. Anyone who fails to do that usually has something to hide and I don't grant such people the presumption of innocence.

As McEvoy said, they were following instructions from their legal people. I'd imagine that anyone would sh*t themselves in such a situation, and would rely on advice from legal advisers. That's why legal advisers exist. If you were to have a one night stand, and she later accused you of raping her, you'd sh*t yourself too, and want some professional advise.

The reason for my attitude is that I reckon the criminal justice system is already slanted far too much in the bad guys favour. "Better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man convicted..." and all that. So the guilty hide behind the checks and balances put in to protect the innocent, e.g. the right to silence (another concept I don't agree with).

I agree, but in this case, the evidence just doesn't stack up. The time-line didn't back her version of events up. Witnesses didn't back her version of events up. Her own best friend didn't back her story up, and exposed her as a lying about certain events. Results from medical examination were not consistant with the treatment she claimed to have received. All of these things however, back up the players version of events. There is just no room for guilt there. That's why McEvoy said what he did, and it's why the DPP said that a rape could not have occurred.

And it's not that I am anti-Dogs, despite all the problems that have come from their quarter. I am against any suggestion of criminals using the law to hide behind and that's what this looks like.

So we'll have to agree to differ on this one.

We will

 

[LESStar58]

i said it from the beginning that they were innocent...

the bad thing is i still believe our supporters will be called ****** at games, but you just have to learn to deal with it..

Mate, I got called a rapist walking down Fitzroy Street, St Kilda whilst wearing my Australian jersey.... I know how you feel.

 

[mightybears]

no one was charged because the evidence given by the police to the DPP was deemed not up to scratch

for whatever reason

 

[Saint 60]

hmmm could be the evidence the Police were given could not be proved -

this unfortunately is one of the great legal standards that have plagued our judiciary system for years...Im sure there would be a heap of Evicence that cannot be accepted by the court system...weather they are guilty or not --
thus the reason they cannot b charged thro lack of our courts evidence..
which is absolutely disgraceful if they did it -
but our great legal system says it cannot b proven...

ergo if they did it..the court system says they did not ---
if they didnt do it...heaps of ppl still say they did because of the media hype and the way they suposidly behaved -

the true winners are the solicitors which made a fortune.....surprise surprise surprise...and possibly the papers and media which sold extra papers thro the interest of the story...