Geelong premiership player Mathew Stokes questioned in drug investigation

[eagles4eva]

Geelong premiership player Mathew Stokes questioned in drug investigation

• <LI class="byline first ">By Mark Buttler <LI class="source ">From: Herald Sun
• February 03, 2010 1:15PM

GEELONG AFL premiership player Mathew Stokes is being questioned over drug offences.
The Herald Sun reports Stokes was questioned this morning by detectives at Geelong police station as part of a drug investigation.
If charged, he is expected to face Geelong Magistrates’ Court this afternoon.
The young forward was part of the Cats’ 2007 flag triumph over Port Adelaide.
He was considered unlucky to not be part of last year’s premiership win over St Kilda.
The Geelong Advertiser reports Stokes's arrest followed a series of drug raids executed on four properties in the Geelong area last Friday.
The raids saw police seize more than $3000 cash believed to be proceeds of crime and about $50,000 worth of drugs from the properties.
Geelong Football Club was expected to make a statement this afternoon.
A Victoria Police spokesman said he could not comment on the matter.

Source http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...ug-investigation/story-e6frfku0-1225826337848

 

[Twizzle]

silly boy Matty

 

[BWNB]

Will be interesting to see how the leadership team deal with him.

 

[Twizzle]

he'll never play again if he is found guilty

life ban is the only option imo

 

[CyberKev]

If its true that he was buying for a friend then he's somewhat unlucky, if its not true, then he's unwittingly done himself a greater disservice.

The former puts him out there for trafficking, guaranteeing a minimum four year suspension if found guilty and essentially ending his career.

Ironically, you'd be better positioned if you came out and said it was yours.

 

[AuckMel]

The former puts him out there for trafficking, guaranteeing a minimum four year suspension if found guilty and essentially ending his career.

Ironically, you'd be better positioned if you came out and said it was yours.

I'm still surprised he didn't say it was (for him) unless there is more to this than we currently know.