Yep, & I'm guessing there is a few more out there like him, who now, will curve their ways, & like he said, is a big learning lesson & hopefully we ( & you) can wish him well in changing going forward.Yeah ok he play now but he’ll always be a piece of shit for what he did to his partner and kid.
It won’t be made public. If it is, it will be a small part in the papers, a small statement.I would like to think so but I’ll bet it won’t get any publicity, the standards these people expect of others doesn’t apply to them IMO
I think I can translate this post for everyone...I'm so glad with this result and in my opinion, the charges should never have been brought forward in the first place. For those saying he does not have a legal case against the NRL, just watch this space. In Fact I am of the opinion that the NRL will be rushing to privately settle the matter out side of the public eye.
The repocussions for the policeman that lied and for the DPP to continue with the charges even considering the lie, will be an interesting thing to see play out. I am sure there is more to this story to yet be told.
The NRL should at the least, immediately clear Jack to play and waver any delay. If he gets to play Friday night it will be a big boost for his loyal team mates, fans and the Club.
Welcome back Jack! You have always had my loyalty on this one.
Oh get over it . That comment would possibly hold some weight if the matter had been resolved quickly . But we are talking about nearly 3 years that this has dragged on for both parties. It’s done the day in court is over it’s time to move on .I think I can translate this post for everyone...
Im so happy because I go for the Dragons and we have one of our stars back, but I’d like to ignore the facts and insinuate that he has been found innocent because that suits me and my passion for the Dragons.
Let’s all get some ice cream lol. You f**kwit.Oh get over it . That comment would possibly hold some weight if the matter had been resolved quickly . But we are talking about nearly 3 years that this has dragged on for both parties. It’s done the day in court is over it’s time to move on .
What facts, were you in the courtroom? The facts are he’s had his day in court and has been deemed not guilty. It’s as simple as that. You don’t want to go down the path of leaving yourself open to defamation do you?I think I can translate this post for everyone...
Im so happy because I go for the Dragons and we have one of our stars back, but I’d like to ignore the facts and insinuate that he has been found innocent because that suits me and my passion for the Dragons.
What a stupid postLet’s all get some ice cream lol. You f**kwit.
Are you questioning the decision? If so, what evidence have you been privy to which leads you to this conclusion? Just because the decision isn’t the one you wanted, doesn’t make it wrong.What planet are you on?
He hasn’t been found not guilty...they just kept having hung trials so eventually the buck has to stop somewhere. Just because you go for Saints, doesn’t mean you can ignore the facts and start your own kangaroo court where you are judge and jury.
Are you questioning the decision? If so, what evidence have you been privy to which leads you to this conclusion? Just because the decision isn’t the one you wanted, doesn’t make it wrong.
Agree Borat , there should not be any impediment whatsoever by the NRL to prevent him from playing for the Dragons .
He should be registered once again and back playing footy when he is ready to take the field .
no chance apparently he's the fittest in the team according to Hook..A timely boost but I do worry almost 3 years out of the game and with the speed it's played he will struggle.
Hmmm, "in your opinion charges should never have been laid". Are you privy to information/evidence from the charges that we are not? These types of charges are notoriously difficult to prove to the required legal standard as the issue becomes one of consent. I have just come off an eight day trial where one could of considered that "something untoward" happened but the prosecution could not produce enough evidence to overcome the required hurdle of proof. Not sure you have a legal background; in fact I am quite sure you don't; so probably best you don't comment any further as to matters to which you are not privy. The issue is relatively simple. The DPP thought they had proof to cross the required threshold; the jury did not (on two occasions) and therefore the matter will not be pursued any further.The charges were dropped (in my opinion, should never have been laid). So if they were dropped after the first trial, Jack would have been playing for the past season or so.
There have been a number of players charged, not stood down and then charges dropped. It all depends on your take on the story of both the accused and the alleged victim who was not stood down by anyone and who did not have to foot a huge legal bill.
Geez, think I will give this thread a wide berth....