Jdb case

[possm]

I'm afraid he (Beattie) is in the early stages on senility or some other neurological condition. If he had just come right out and said something like: "The NRL follows the rule of law and that is non-negotiable. He is innocent unless proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. Therefore we won't pursue any action against Mr. de Belin until the court case is completed." It would hardly be getting a mention in the media by now.

Or, if Beattie and Greenburg just sat down with De Belin and negotiated a deal where compensation was offered and De Belin could himself issue a statement saying that he is standing down until the legal proceedings are completed because he does not want this issue to be a distraction.

 

[Morotti]

Yeah I get that’s its a technicality, but these things often are. The rule doesnt apply to the act, it applies to the status of being charged.
For example let’s say next year a player gets charged for a murder that was alleged to have happened 5 years ago - the act happened before the rule was brought in, but it wouldn’t be retrospective and still apply because they are charged now. That’s obviously an extreme example, but I think it illustrates the principle.

No that is not correct.

No one is aware of the incident. So the rule would then be coming in and you would have no idea of that incident and therefore could not put a rule in place that could cover it. Because you don't know it ever happened.
We are talking about something already know to the NRL when they made the rule.

Your example doesn't equate.

 

[The Damo]

Are you serious? Where is the f**king link to the graphic your showed a few days ago????

Yes I’m serious. The first link is the article the graph came from. Looks like it’s converted to text, but the numbers are there - do you need pictures drawn in crayon?
The others are scholarly works that’ll be way beyond your capacity, so I guess don’t bother.
But here’s an excerpt
“
93% of offenders are male (Australian Bureau of Statistics - Recorded Crime - Offenders, 2013-14)
1 in 6 reports to Police of rape and less than 1 in 7 reports of incest or sexual penetration of a child result in prosecution”

Hey look - you’ve still produced zero evidence - I’ll ask for the fifth time - you got any for your false claim?

 

[Morotti]

Like everything about this case, nothing is clear cut.

The Nrl already had the power to stand down JDB under the existing code of conduct. The only thing that really changed was the mandatory stand down for serious crime.

Nrl can easily provide examples of standing down players before trial.

Actually they can stand him down if he has brought the game into disrepute. The only way he could have done that is if he is guilty. Since he has plead not guilty, that would have been a hard line to tread.
Because whilst he has been charged, it would mean anyone could make up false allegations and have someone charged so they could technically be bringing the game into disrepute. Opening up blackmail and all sorts.

So in my opinion that would have been hard to implement.

 

[Old Kogarah Boy 1]

He is related to the great one, Sid Einfield

Was he working for Kramer's lawyer?
Jackie says ............. “It’s lewd, lascivious, salacious, outrageous!”

 

[The Damo]

Actually they can stand him down if he has brought the game into disrepute. The only way he could have done that is if he is guilty. Since he has plead not guilty, that would have been a hard line to tread.
Because whilst he has been charged, it would mean anyone could make up false allegations and have someone charged so they could technically be bringing the game into disrepute. Opening up blackmail and all sorts.

So in my opinion that would have been hard to implement.

Argh Christ! You can’t just get someone charged with serious crimes without evidence. This feels like groundhog day

 

[Morotti]

Argh Christ! You can’t just get someone charged with serious crimes without evidence. This feels like groundhog day

Well in my opinion it isn't so simple. I mean it is difficult when we don't know all the ins and outs of the case and I don't want to go off what we do know as it is incomplete information. But the basic concept is he has been charged and has plead not guilty. So he is innocent until proven guilty.
For example Brett Stewart was charged and acquitted. Shaun Kenny dowall was charged and acquitted.
So you can get charged with a serious crime and be not guilty.

 

[The Damo]

No that is not correct.

No one is aware of the incident. So the rule would then be coming in and you would have no idea of that incident and therefore could not put a rule in place that could cover it. Because you don't know it ever happened.
We are talking about something already know to the NRL when they made the rule.

Your example doesn't equate.

You seem reasonable, and I’m not trying to be combative with you, but I disagree on how you are defining retrospective. The rule covers anyone charged. Doesn’t matter when the alleged crime took place. Doesn’t matter they knew it would cover Jack. If the charges were dropped the rule would stop applying to him.

 

[Morotti]

You seem reasonable, and I’m not trying to be combative with you, but I disagree on how you are defining retrospective. The rule covers anyone charged. Doesn’t matter when the alleged crime took place. Doesn’t matter they knew it would cover Jack. If the charges were dropped the rule would stop applying to him.

Ok I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. If you agree? To agree to disagree?

 

[The Damo]

Well in my opinion it isn't so simple. I mean it is difficult when we don't know all the ins and outs of the case and I don't want to go off what we do know as it is incomplete information. But the basic concept is he has been charged and has plead not guilty. So he is innocent until proven guilty.
For example Brett Stewart was charged and acquitted. Shaun Kenny dowall was charged and acquitted.
So you can get charged with a serious crime and be not guilty.

Yes, but charges only get laid if the DPP thinks there is a reasonable prospect of conviction. Not just from an allegation. There’s an investigation, evidence is collected and assessed. And neither of those charges were serious enough to trigger the automatic Stan down in the new rule I think.

 

[The Damo]

Ok I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. If you agree? To agree to disagree?

Agree

 

[2218]

Damo
I have heard your comments before but all seem to be google quoted. Have you any legal qualifications or just opinion or speculation. I don’t need anything that would give up your position just something that relates to the real world. Are you a relative of a victim or an nrl spy. Please

You seem reasonable, and I’m not trying to be combative with you, but I disagree on how you are defining retrospective. The rule covers anyone charged. Doesn’t matter when the alleged crime took place. Doesn’t matter they knew it would cover Jack. If the charges were dropped the rule would stop applying to him.

o

 

[TruSaint]

Damo
. Are you a relative of a victim or an nrl spy. Please

Does he need to be a lawyer ?

Should 90% of the posts here be taken down on the basis that they posters have no legal qualifications?

 

[Glenn012]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha -
Says the guy who has provided zero evidence for the false claim “ the bar is set very low to be charged with rape”.
Your continued refusal to produce ANY evidence can only lead me to believe you got the idea from some neckbeard incel on YouTube.
Come on dude, you made the claim - where do you know that from?

Now it looks to me that you are arguing in bad faith due to your refusal to provide a single piece of evidence, but I’m an optimist and out of my commitment to educating the ignorant, try these on for size.
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...ws-story/9fc4a65689f180b3534d79f4fd019b8e/amp
https://aifs.gov.au/publications/sexual-assault-laws-australia
http://www.casa.org.au/casa_pdf.php?document=statistics
https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/sexualattributiondiagrams.pdf

You are right. The data is at the bottom. It can all be discarded except for 2 things. It was 2009-2010. In the #MeToo political environment, you can be sure still more people are charged now but probably no more or even less are convicted. So here is the only data that matters in all that:

of these, 3513 were reports of rape).

2,381 reports resulted in further investigation.

1,643 went to court.

631 recorded a conviction in Magistrates or Children’s court.

So a little over 1/3 are convicted. in other words, the bar is set very low for someone to be charged. Precisely as I said. I would bet for murder, robbery, assault or a myriad of other violent crimes, the conviction rate is much higher. In the absense of you not providing any data to show otherwise, I will assume I am right.

No need to apologize to me personally but I would appreciate if you get the f**k off JDBs back on this forum and talk about him as you would any other man who is innocent unless proven guilty. If you don't like him as a RL player, that's fine. Leave your criticism of him to that.

 

[possm]

Yes, but charges only get laid if the DPP thinks there is a reasonable prospect of conviction. Not just from an allegation. There’s an investigation, evidence is collected and assessed. And neither of those charges were serious enough to trigger the automatic Stan down in the new rule I think.

The DPP charged Brett Stewart and SKD however, both were aquited.

 

[Glenn012]

Or, if Beattie and Greenburg just sat down with De Belin and negotiated a deal where compensation was offered and De Belin could himself issue a statement saying that he is standing down until the legal proceedings are completed because he does not want this issue to be a distraction.

He could do that but as his lawyer has been demonstrating, it would have a tremendously negative effect on his ability to make a living. It would also in my opinion and it seems Jacks opinion, suggest he was guilty when he is adamant that isn't the case. IMO it would amount to Jack slandering himself. He already has Old Timer, Rob Dragon and etc to do that.

 

[Old Timer]

This is what is classed as a passive-aggressive denouncement of Jack. Your analogy is absurd unless you think there is a danger of Jack sexually assaulting opposition players during NRL games.

Only in your opinion is that the case.
I was simply stating a scenario involving someone who has had sexual misconduct allegations made against him and is also very much in the public eye.
Re your denouncement of my analogy you fail completely to comprehend the matter at hand.
This is not about re-offending this is entirely about the appropriate actions to be taken for an offence that has been alleged to have occurred and it should be noted that the allegations have enough evidence in the brief handed up by the police for the DPP and the court to think the case has to be heard and a jury make a decision.

 

[Old Timer]

He could do that but as his lawyer has been demonstrating, it would have a tremendously negative effect on his ability to make a living. It would also in my opinion and it seems Jacks opinion, suggest he was guilty when he is adamant that isn't the case. IMO it would amount to Jack slandering himself. He already has Old Timer, Rob Dragon and etc to do that.

And exactly where have I slandered JDB?
By all means have a look at all my posts and if you can find where I have by all means bring it to my attention.
So if you want to have a discussion then do so by other means than making up things to suit your purpose.
For the record I have simply asked that the judicial system be allowed to do its work and I have openly stated that I believe under the circumstances and in light of the charges that JDB should be stood down on full pay and I have clearly provided the reasons behind that philosophy.
I have offered no opinion as to whether JDB id guilty or not and have only offered sage advice that people should be very careful in insinuating the women involved is a liar.
Opinions as to guilt should be left to the jury as they will have all the evidence of which we have none other than her claims against JDB and his subsequent statement that his not guilty.

 

[The Damo]

Damo
I have heard your comments before but all seem to be google quoted. Have you any legal qualifications or just opinion or speculation. I don’t need anything that would give up your position just something that relates to the real world. Are you a relative of a victim or an nrl spy. Please

o

Nah, not a lawyer, nor do I play one on tv. Not a spy either, though if the nrl wants to put me on the payroll I’m game.
On the NRL rule stuff it’s just my opinion, but I like to base my opinions on evidence and I read a lot.
On the sexual assault stuff I’ve got more experience, I’ve worked with people with disabilities for 20 years, and in that time I’ve supported more than a few victims, and a few perpetrators through the process of allegations, charges, trial, therapy for the trauma and rehabilitation after release from prison. So not a lawyer but I know how the system works in a practical sense.
I am also a relative, friend and partner to multiple people who’ve been assaulted, and know how harmful some of the attitudes expressed in this thread are. Which is why I push back on them even when I know the person is acting in bad faith.

 

[The Damo]

You are right. The data is at the bottom. It can all be discarded except for 2 things. It was 2009-2010. In the #MeToo political environment, you can be sure still more people are charged now but probably no more or even less are convicted. So here is the only data that matters in all that:

of these, 3513 were reports of rape).

2,381 reports resulted in further investigation.

1,643 went to court.

631 recorded a conviction in Magistrates or Children’s court.

So a little over 1/3 are convicted. in other words, the bar is set very low for someone to be charged. Precisely as I said. I would bet for murder, robbery, assault or a myriad of other violent crimes, the conviction rate is much higher. In the absense of you not providing any data to show otherwise, I will assume I am right.

No need to apologize to me personally but I would appreciate if you get the f**k off JDBs back on this forum and talk about him as you would any other man who is innocent unless proven guilty. If you don't like him as a RL player, that's fine. Leave your criticism of him to that.

Not surprised you aren’t much good at numbers. And that you assume stuff without data.
1 - can’t assume charge rates have increased without a little thing called evidence, you know the stuff you have none of.
2 - here’s the full quote
7,066 rape, indecent assault and incest were reported to Victoria Police (of these, 3513 were reports of rape).
2,381 reports resulted in further investigation.
1,643 went to court.
You’re assuming every one that went to court was rape, and you’re discounting indecent assault and incest cases.
Less than 1 in 4 were charged in Victoria.
In NSW it’s close to 1 in 7.
Very low bar my arse.

Here’s an excerpt from another of those links or you to twist.
Fact Sheet: Statistics about sexual assault
17% of women and 4% of men experienced sexual assault since the age of 15 (Australian Bureau of Statistics - Personal Safety Survey, 2012)
A University study found 20.6% of women and 10.5% of men reported non-penetrative childhood sexual abuse by the age of 16 and that 7.9% of women and 7.5% of men reported penetrative childhood sexual abuse by the age 16 years. (Mamun, Lawlor, Oâ€TMCalloghan, Bor, Williams. & Najman, 2007 Queensland University study)
93% of offenders are male (Australian Bureau of Statistics - Recorded Crime - Offenders, 2013-14)
1 in 6 reports to Police of rape and less than 1 in 7 reports of incest or sexual penetration of a child result in prosecution (Sexual Offences: Law & Procedure Final Report, Victorian Law Reform Commission, 2004)
Only about 17% of reported sexual offences result in a conviction, a figure consistent with data from other States and overseas. (Queensland Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2003)
Violence against women and their children cost the Australian economy $13.6 billion. (Australian Bureau of Statistics - Defining the Data Challenge for Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence, 2013)
15% of women had been sexually assaulted by a known person compared to 4% who were assaulted by a stranger (Australian Bureau of Statistics - Personal Safety Survey, 2012)