Greg Bird charged with violent attack

[Frenzy.]

it doesnt take an einstein to figure it out.

the fact that he went to the station that evening for questioning proves that there wasnt a conversation between them and police at the hospital that morning.

it also says in the paper, they told hospital staff what had happened.
not police.

thats why i think its dribble.

Honestly Dodge. Have a re read of that and reconsider. It proves nothing. People often speak to police initially before they go to the police centre.

Accident and Emergency departments always have police in them talking to victims and witnesses who later have to go to centres for formal statement, formal charging or just further "talks"

Not having a go at you DPG, this time anyway , but your contention is illogical.

 

[spider]

jc is a good bloke

but regardless or not - no need for cheap shots

 

[Frenzy.]

jc is a good bloke

but regardless or not - no need for cheap shots

That's your opinion spide. Mine is far different.

 

[spider]

i was referring to the context of the post - not personal opinion

im sure you know what i mean

 

[Frenzy.]

Not really spide.

 

[millersnose]

i havent seen anything untoward from jc either


he seems a pretty good fella..for a leftist

 

[millersnose]

it doesnt take an einstein to figure it out.

the fact that he went to the station that evening for questioning proves that there wasnt a conversation between them and police at the hospital that morning.

that has to be the funniest post so far in a very amusing thread


does the fact i went to the footy with spider proove that i didnt communicate with him before hand?

 

[millersnose]

if the recent charges stick and he is found guilty - do the club continue their stance

i understand their stance on the GBH charge, but the recent ones are minor to that one

its a bit like oj simpson being found not guilty in a criminal court and then being found guilty in a civil court

everyone knows he done it

and if bird pleads guilty to these lesser charges then the same applies

the club is pretty damned

 

[spider]

does the fact i went to the footy with spider proove that i didnt communicate with him before hand?

i like the use of the word communicate - lucky it was not 'text'...

its a bit like oj simpson being found not guilty in a criminal court and then being found guilty in a civil court

everyone knows he done it

and if bird pleads guilty to these lesser charges then the same applies

the club is pretty damned

yep - thats my point

 

[blacktip-reefy]

I don't think the club is damned at all.
I HIGHLY doubt Bird will play for the club again whilst certain people are there.

& by that I mean, Birds choice, not the club. I don't thinik Bird will hold the club to ransom for their irrational actions.

 

[Inferno]

I don't think the club is damned at all.
I HIGHLY doubt Bird will play for the club again whilst certain people are there.

& by that I mean, Birds choice, not the club. I don't thinik Bird will hold the club to ransom for their irrational actions.

Well there is less of an incentive with them out of the finals campaign for this year.

That said, I'd have thought someone would bring up Noddy not being there next year making us more attractive to him...

 

[Quigs]

So how long is it predicted that this drawn out saga will be drawn out too before it comes to its end.

I know I have had enough of it.

If it was a TV show I would of changed channels a long time ago.

I suppose there will be another media circus prior to the next hearing.

Cheers
Declared Idiot #88
Quigs

 

[Dave Q]

These arent back up charges. The back charge of Assault ABH had already been laid. But no doubt these new charges have been added because the assault charges wont get proven and the detectives are probably pissed off with the whole thing. There is no reason why these charges couldnt have been laid in the first place.

I concurr

But in saying that, what Bird said to both the police and in the text messages caused police to go off and investigate Watson and interview him etc so whilst some may see this as a bit of sour grapes or loading Bird up by police, why shouldnt he be charged with these offences. Mentioning Watson and the sending of the text messages are the two things that we know did happen. IMO he will be pushing sh*t up hill to beat these two charges. They are not difficult to prove.

Likely

But like Miller said there will be no jail time. If found guilty he would be probably looking at a fine or even a S.10 non conviction if he has a clean record. I would expect, however a bit of plea bargaining to go on. Maybe plead to one if the other is dropped.

No section 10, agree with plea bargain.

These charges also wont require a new set of facts. The elements of these offences are more than covered in the original set.

Unknown, I havent seen them, have you?

Just when things were probably starting to favour Bird. It will be interesting to see how the club views the matter if cleared on the assault but convicted on the False reps and public mischief. I dont see these charges as being worse or even equal to common assault, offensive conduct and drink driving where numerous players have been found guilty of of e.g Misi and Seu Seu who are with us

Disagree. Assault, offensive conduct are more common. False acc and public mischief in this context show a higher degree of evilness.

 

[millersnose]

lol

'degrees of evillness'

is that a legal term

 

[RUBIKS]

G’Day all,

Shockingly I have read every post in this huge thread and for some strange reason felt compelled to sign up and clarify something that seems to have been mixed up towards the end. (I think the last 40 pages should cover it... )

The blame game: Correct me if I'm wrong however somewhere in this tome of a thread it will state that the text says something along the lines of “My manager is sorting this S#!^ out” The reference to "we've told the police" and "how do you feel about that" were made by Watson verbally when he gave his statement to police about what was said between himself and Bird during a call. (Making this his word against Birds)

People here seem to be treating the "how do you feel about that" comments as the text message.

 

[spider]

i thought it was reported as the message bird left on watson's voice mail - as he was on the golf course

either way - im sure the message in either format was kept by watson

 

[blacktip-reefy]

People here seem to be treating the "how do you feel about that" comments as the text message.

From my sources that is correct.
What Bird said verbally, what he said in the txt & what Watson said to police are 3 completely, & I emphasise this, completely , different things.

My info may not be as solid as others on here however.

 

[The Dodger]

I am not boasting about anything but like I said, are you dumb enough to think that of all the people who post on this forum there are not a few who may be lawyers, cops, court staff etc who understand the law and processes and perhaps know a bit more about this matter than the average Joe.

My aim throughout this thread has been to clarify events, evidence and the processes involved based on the facts sheet tendered and my knowledge and experience, mainly so the wrong information doesnt get spead around.

If you have a problem with that then I wont post anymore. Ill leave it to you Sherlock Holmes to take up that role.

im not having a go at you.

thats just what i think, if they had a conversation with him in the morning, wouldnt they have taken him to the station straight away to provide a statement. it even said in the paper that they spoke to hospital staff.

im no lawyer or cop or anything like that and im sure there are people on here with those types of professions. i never said there wasnt.

Honestly Dodge. Have a re read of that and reconsider. It proves nothing. People often speak to police initially before they go to the police centre.

Accident and Emergency departments always have police in them talking to victims and witnesses who later have to go to centres for formal statement, formal charging or just further "talks"

Not having a go at you DPG, this time anyway , but your contention is illogical.

well why didnt they take him to the station right away if that was the case?

no offense taken.
dually noted, captain.

that has to be the funniest post so far in a very amusing thread


does the fact i went to the footy with spider proove that i didnt communicate with him before hand?

your an imbecile.
i blame the jews for your stupidity.

 

[Dave Q]

: Greg Bird v Police of NSW
: 1 October 2008
Court of Public Opinon ( Sutho)

Statement of Fred Nerk

This statement made by me accurately sets out the evidence that I would be prepared to give in court as a witness. The statement is true to the best of my knowledge and beleif and I make it knowing that if it is tenderd in evidence, I will be liable for prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything that I know to be false.

1. I know someone who knows a mate of Greg Bird's.

2. I like fishfingers

3. My mate told me words to the effect that

"My mate told me that Greg Bird told him that:

I was holding up my champagne glass with my right hand. We were toasting the success of the company who provides me with my ugly designer shirts"

We chinked glasses and had a swig.

She moved quickly towards me, she told me later she was going to kiss me.

But I panicked. I had a league flashback and thought I had the ball and was being tackled by Mick Crocker.

So I put me arm out to fend her off but I forgot I was holding a glass."

4. I do not rmember anything my mate told me after that.

5. Then I stole a car, rego number GFH 678A from the corner of Seppo and Yobbo streets at 10.30pm .

6. I often steal cars for re-birthing purposes.

FRED NERK.

 

[coolumsharkie]

: Greg Bird v Police of NSW
: 1 October 2008
Court of Public Opinon ( Sutho)

Statement of Fred Nerk

This statement made by me accurately sets out the evidence that I would be prepared to give in court as a witness. The statement is true to the best of my knowledge and beleif and I make it knowing that if it is tenderd in evidence, I will be liable for prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything that I know to be false.

1. I know someone who knows a mate of Greg Bird's.

2. I like fishfingers

3. My mate told me words to the effect that

"My mate told me that Greg Bird told him that:

I was holding up my champagne glass with my right hand. We were toasting the success of the company who provides me with my ugly designer shirts"

We chinked glasses and had a swig.

She moved quickly towards me, she told me later she was going to kiss me.

But I panicked. I had a league flashback and thought I had the ball and was being tackled by Mick Crocker.

So I put me arm out to fend her off and I forgot I was holding a glass."

4. I do not rmember anything my mate told me after that.

5. Then I stole a car.

FRED NERK.

Haven't you got neighbors or divorce court to watch ?

Perry Masons