Eels Salary Cap MK II

[Chipmunk]

I've still yet to see any reporting in this media attack that we have breached any salary cap rules in the time period since the previous NRL investigation was conducted. So the period that everyone seems to be talking about, the NRL had the opportunity to undertake a complete investigation, completed their investigation, prosecuted us for our offences, found us guilty for said offences and provided us with a punishment for those offences.

Surely the common law legal principles of Double Jeopardy would still apply??? I dare say if the club challenged any finding we would have at least a legal argument.

 

[strider]

I've still yet to see any reporting in this media attack that we have breached any salary cap rules in the time period since the previous NRL investigation was conducted. So the period that everyone seems to be talking about, the NRL had the opportunity to undertake a complete investigation, completed their investigation, prosecuted us for our offences, found us guilty for said offences and provided us with a punishment for those offences.

Surely the common law legal principles of Double Jeopardy would still apply??? I dare say if the club challenged any finding we would have at least a legal argument.

I wouldnt think so ... if new stuff emerges then its new stuff to be investigated .... plus the fact we perhaps knowingly hid the new stuff previously

 

[Tooooks]

I've still yet to see any reporting in this media attack that we have breached any salary cap rules in the time period since the previous NRL investigation was conducted. So the period that everyone seems to be talking about, the NRL had the opportunity to undertake a complete investigation, completed their investigation, prosecuted us for our offences, found us guilty for said offences and provided us with a punishment for those offences.

Surely the common law legal principles of Double Jeopardy would still apply??? I dare say if the club challenged any finding we would have at least a legal argument.

Double jeopardy applies in a criminal court, not an internal investigation by an organisation.

Even in a criminal matter if new evidence is discovered a person can be retried.

 

[Stagger eel]

There is a post by Phil on the other site saying this can't happen at the upcoming AGM because no one has given 21 days notice of such a motion. Is this correct?

Possibly, and if that's the case than the ex CEO has missed the boat again...

I couldnt care less anyway as long as they kill each other in the process and leave the coaching staff and players alone because that's all i care about.

 

[Delboy]

If another big club has salary cap problems, how much venting and anger will Raaaay, Kent (spelling ), Slothfield, Massoud devote to it

Will show who's,pushing the buttons

 

[ash411]

If another big club has salary cap problems, how much venting and anger will Raaaay, Kent (spelling ), Slothfield, Massoud devote to it

Will show who's,pushing the buttons

You would assume that they would have to go for them just as hard as they've gone for us, given they are such dedicated journalists with unquestionable integrity and all.. :roll:

And if they don't, they should be called out on it.

 

[Chipmunk]

Double jeopardy applies in a criminal court, not an internal investigation by an organisation.

Even in a criminal matter if new evidence is discovered a person can be retried.

They can't be retried in a criminal matter if they have already been found guilty of the same offence for the same crime and received a punishment.

An administrative/regulatory body still can't investigate you again, if it has conducted and completed the investigation, found you guilty of an offence and handed down a punishment for the same offence. The NRL had the opportunity to investigate the offences thoroughly, but appeared to have missed things in their original investigation. Yet, we were still 'convicted of an offence' from their investigation and received a punishment.

At the very least there is a legal argument for it, which I think the NRL probably is aware of.

 

[parra-matters]

If the other club is part owned by News Ltd then there will be nothing in the papers but more pressure on the Eels.

 

[84 Baby]

They can't be retried in a criminal matter if they have already been found guilty of the same offence for the same crime and received a punishment.

An administrative/regulatory body still can't investigate you again, if it has conducted and completed the investigation, found you guilty of an offence and handed down a punishment for the same offence. The NRL had the opportunity to investigate the offences thoroughly, but appeared to have missed things in their original investigation. Yet, we were still 'convicted of an offence' from their investigation and received a punishment.

At the very least there is a legal argument for it, which I think the NRL probably is aware of.

They could in theory investigate new evidence from same period as original investigation, depends on scope of investigation, but yes if the new evidence is within realm of what original investigation entailed, they can't go ahead and repunish us for their own incompetence. They could in theory though unsuspend the penalty they did apply, again depends upon scope of penalty arrangements

 

[Chipmunk]

They could in theory investigate new evidence from same period as original investigation, depends on scope of investigation, but yes if the new evidence is within realm of what original investigation entailed, they can't go ahead and repunish us for their own incompetence. They could in theory though unsuspend the penalty they did apply, again depends upon scope of penalty arrangements

Again, there appears to be a legal argument to challenge.

 

[84 Baby]

Again, there appears to be a legal argument to challenge.

We don't know what the scope of original investigation was, nor the terms of the suspended penalty. It's okay though because the Terrorgraph do

 

[muznik]

Referring to the K*nt article posted a few pages back where he is saying we should be all but kicked out of the comp as a n example....

If he wants Officials & players to be now held accountable for salary cap breaches (convenient for the Melb Scum, QLD & their Golden Boy, future immortals) then how about he backs it up with ...
If Parra are found to have no case to answer, or the breaches so minor they warrant no penalty, that he be suspended from reporting on NRL for life (or min 2yrs) ?

Sounds fair ?

 

[strider]

They can't be retried in a criminal matter if they have already been found guilty of the same offence for the same crime and received a punishment.

An administrative/regulatory body still can't investigate you again, if it has conducted and completed the investigation, found you guilty of an offence and handed down a punishment for the same offence. The NRL had the opportunity to investigate the offences thoroughly, but appeared to have missed things in their original investigation. Yet, we were still 'convicted of an offence' from their investigation and received a punishment.

At the very least there is a legal argument for it, which I think the NRL probably is aware of.

In our salary cap case, I don't believe we are talking about the same matter with new evidence - they are new matters.

ie. more like - you killed 3 people - they know of 2 and convict you for them - they later find out you killed the 3rd - I'm sure you then cop a 3rd conviction

 

[The EELiminator]

If Parra are found to have no case to answer, or the breaches so minor they warrant no penalty, that he be suspended from reporting on NRL for life (or min 2yrs) ?

Sounds fair ?

sue the merkin for defamation

 

[Gronk]

In our salary cap case, I don't believe we are talking about the same matter with new evidence - they are new matters.

ie. more like - you killed 3 people - they know of 2 and convict you for them - they later find out you killed the 3rd - I'm sure you then cop a 3rd conviction

Hey ! You searched my house and found 3 bodies. You can't charge me for the other 4, cos you didn't find them the first time around ! :lol:

 

[ash411]

Referring to the K*nt article posted a few pages back where he is saying we should be all but kicked out of the comp as a n example....

If he wants Officials & players to be now held accountable for salary cap breaches (convenient for the Melb Scum, QLD & their Golden Boy, future immortals) then how about he backs it up with ...
If Parra are found to have no case to answer, or the breaches so minor they warrant no penalty, that he be suspended from reporting on NRL for life (or min 2yrs) ?

Sounds fair ?

That would be great, but unfortunately, Journalists are kind of like NRL referees. Above both question and judgement. A journo can lie through their teeth, be wrong, destroy someone, and completely get away with it.

 

[Gronk]

Didn't Kent post an article recently that said that what a journalist prints may be true today but not tomorrow ? Or some sort of obscure spin like that.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

They can't be retried in a criminal matter if they have already been found guilty of the same offence for the same crime and received a punishment.

An administrative/regulatory body still can't investigate you again, if it has conducted and completed the investigation, found you guilty of an offence and handed down a punishment for the same offence. The NRL had the opportunity to investigate the offences thoroughly, but appeared to have missed things in their original investigation. Yet, we were still 'convicted of an offence' from their investigation and received a punishment.

At the very least there is a legal argument for it, which I think the NRL probably is aware of.

I think you are making a very subtle mistake here. You are correct in the sense that you can't be retried for murdering the same person, if you've already been found guilty of murdering that person (unless we are talking about evidence that helps get you off). Let's say you actually murdered two people, but the police initially only had enough evidence to try you for 1 murder. You go to court and get found guilty. Subsequently evidence sufficient to charge you with the additional murder arises. They can charge you.

Similarly, lets say you are charged with 8 cases of related fraud. You are tried and found guilty on all counts. New evidence arises that you actually defrauded another 20 people in separate acts. You can definitely be tried for this, even you used the same MO as in the cases for which you have already been found guilty. These are separate instances of fraud, and the fact that you've already been convicted of contemporaneous frauds does not prevent you being charged again.

Similarly, re the cap, the fact that we were investigated and found to have made X breaches of the cap, does not affect the NRL's ability to level further charges based on evidence of additional breaches not discovered previously.

 

[Chipmunk]

In our salary cap case, I don't believe we are talking about the same matter with new evidence - they are new matters.

ie. more like - you killed 3 people - they know of 2 and convict you for them - they later find out you killed the 3rd - I'm sure you then cop a 3rd conviction

I think you are making a very subtle mistake here. You are correct in the sense that you can't be retried for murdering the same person, if you've already been found guilty of murdering that person (unless we are talking about evidence that helps get you off). Let's say you actually murdered two people, but the police initially only had enough evidence to try you for 1 murder. You go to court and get found guilty. Subsequently evidence sufficient to charge you with the additional murder arises. They can charge you.

Similarly, lets say you are charged with 8 cases of related fraud. You are tried and found guilty on all counts. New evidence arises that you actually defrauded another 20 people in separate acts. You can definitely be tried for this, even you used the same MO as in the cases for which you have already been found guilty. These are separate instances of fraud, and the fact that you've already been convicted of contemporaneous frauds does not prevent you being charged again.

Similarly, re the cap, the fact that we were investigated and found to have made X breaches of the cap, does not affect the NRL's ability to level further charges based on evidence of additional breaches not discovered previously.

What you're saying are differences crimes of the same offence.

I'd argue that you can only commit the crime of breaching a particular salary cap (of which I believe there are four) once in a given year though. The offence is 'breaching the salary cap'. I don't believe there are multiple offences of breaching one particular salary caps. There are four salary caps and we breached them all for what I believe is the same years that they are investigating for what we have already been punished for. I don't believe that we were ever found guilty of say 19 breaches of say the 4 different salary caps. The crime was being a certain amount over one particular cap and that is the offence. I'd argue that there are only four possible crimes that can be committed in any given year.

Comparing it your murder analogy, you can only kill the same person once, just as you can only be found guilty of breaching the salary caps once in any given year.

Again...the fact that were discussing it like this it's certainly something that could be legally argued.

 

[84 Baby]

In our salary cap case, I don't believe we are talking about the same matter with new evidence - they are new matters.

ie. more like - you killed 3 people - they know of 2 and convict you for them - they later find out you killed the 3rd - I'm sure you then cop a 3rd conviction

No it's closer to you killed 3 people, convict you 2 for murder & 1 for manslaughter because the police couldn't be assed investigating the 3rd properly then a new piece of evidence gets given to the media