Jdb case

[Gareth67]

Might be a good idea for the mods to close this thread down.

Yes it would , however we ‘ gentlemen and ladies ‘ of the forum have discussed those so called ‘criminals ‘ from other clubs ( whom had not yet had their day in court ) so therefore we also must swallow our own medicine regardless of just how bad the taste may be .

But I believe that discretion should be used and people should not jump to conclusions- one way or the other . Enough said by me .

 

[ouryears]

My whole point is around the type of behaviour I would consider acceptable in those I call friends around me, but clearly your agenda is something completely different.

I’m not going to waste my time (or everyone else’s) right now given you’re clearly off on another one of your tangents..

As you agree, he may not be guilty, so that's good.

However, he also may not have undressed to be in the nude, for all we know the total accusation is bull shit.

How can you claim his behaviour is poor until the facts come out?

What proven bad behaviour has there been?

I hope you weren't there at the Last Supper judging the man in the sky.....

 

[muzby]

However, he also may not have undressed to be in the nude

Interesting concept.

What other methods can I use to get nude if I don’t get undressed?

 

[Dragonslayer]

Whatever happens in this case there will be no winner. Lives will be forever changed.

I was always taught that action has both positive and negative reactions, unfortunately in today's society we tend to overlook what impact our actions can create.

It is best to let this run its course through the court system, however, as I said lives will be changed forever and that's the sad part because this is the negative side of action.

 

[possm]

How do you not get this?

Doing the dirty is bad enough.

Doing it when you are about to have a kid is irresponsible, selfish and screws up multiple lives.

Bringing a kid into the world comes with a raft of responsibilities, playing up runs the risk of bringing a child into the world in a broken family.

If someone thinks with their dick instead of their head when they are about to become a dad, they are not someone I’d want to associate with.

I'd like to leave moral judgement for after the legal system has determined guilt or non guilt.

 

[possm]

I'm pretty sure we would be one down now? the money used for Jack would still be taking up part of our cap? But of course he wont be playing.

His salary cannot be used for anything other than player salary. If he is not getting paid and you can't use this money in 2020, then surely the money can be used to pay for his replacement.

 

[ouryears]

Interesting concept.

What other methods can I use to get nude if I don’t get undressed?

Wake up, stop being smart.
He may not have undressed.
It's all hearsay.

You weren't there.
So hushhhhh

 

[ALSGI]

Very bad situation, especially for all the victims who ever they may be. I say victims because there are always many victims on both sides. We will never know the truth unless the person in the wrong makes a full admission.

Unfortunately, our justice system usually results in the prosecution presenting the worst possible scenario whilst the defence presents the best possible scenario. So regardless of the judicial decision, unless the person in the wrong makes a full admission the truth is often somewhere in between. I think whatever the final decisions are that our justice system is usually just in terms of guilt but the penalties are totally adhoc.

Best wishes to all those hurt in this and may the wrong doer be punished accordingly.

 

[FlameThrower]

There is another lower grade player allegedly involved- his version of alleged events may decide the outcome. Overall a disastrous situation by all concerned. JDB has to be stood down until Feb court case.

 

[rednwhites]

From a fan's perspective, the irony of just when things were getting exciting there is big let down, just like our on field track record the last 4 years.

 

[slippery5]

There is another lower grade player allegedly involved- his version of alleged events may decide the outcome. Overall a disastrous situation by all concerned. JDB has to be stood down until Feb court case.

My worry is, has the other player been charged also, or is it his version of events that police received to lay the charges?

 

[hewi]

Given he’s handed himself in, I’d have to assume he would have had a lawyer with him when answering questions. The cops must think they’ve got a pretty good case and evidence to charge him straight up with that serious a charge. Sure innocent until proven guilty etc, but odds are he’s at best been present when something awful was done, and the options only get worse from there. I hope the woman is ok and has support, Christ this is awful.

I had crap put on

There is another lower grade player allegedly involved- his version of alleged events may decide the outcome. Overall a disastrous situation by all concerned. JDB has to be stood down until Feb court case.

February I think you will find might only be a commital hearing. I’m sure it will be sent for trial and I suspect that will be in close to 12 months.

 

[KiamaSaint]

My worry is, has the other player been charged also, or is it his version of events that police received to lay the charges?

Surely the Police would lay charges based solely on what the victim said.

 

[Outlaw Pete]

*Deleted*

I don’t believe I’ve personally criticised anyone on this forum before but you are a goose. I’m surprised you can string 2 words together but your user name should have given some clue.

 

[ouryears]

*Deleted*.

She says he got naked, he says he didn’t.
The whole thing is part of the innocent till proven guilty process

 

[BLM01]

She says he got naked, he says he didn’t.
The whole thing is part of the innocent till proven guilty process

What were they doing all in a unit together anyway if the boys were supposed to be going to another night club as indicated whilst in the taxi (just the facts as we have been told - all stupid thus far)

All I can and will say on the matter is the story (as it has been told by 1 party ATM and reported through the press) is disappointing and a kick in the guts to our season...thanks JDB for being stupid and putting yourself in that position innocent or quilty.
Yes I am thinking of myself and St George 1st..and it is going to do some damage to our club's image with sponsorship etc unfortunately we will have to be in damage control and probably forced the announcement of Norman to be put on the back burner.

Let it play out in the courts before deciding and name calling and feeling sorry for anybody yet!
And bringing his status quo about his current relationship without even knowing where that is at is juvenile regardless of his impending fatherhood.

 

[SIR LANCELOT]

Glad I am not running around in the clubbing scene these days. Being a celebrity does have many drawbacks especially when it comes to the attractiveness of the male and female personalities getting together. I am pissed off that the Dragons name is up there with shit headlines though.. Do the wrong thing in society and pay the penalty I say. No matter who the player is if found guilty the old saying is DO THE CRIME DO THE TIME

 

[BLM01]

Glad I am not running around in the clubbing scene these days. Being a celebrity does have many drawbacks especially when it comes to the attractiveness of the male and female personalities getting together.

You know the NRL spend all this money on education of players and it clearly does not work for all.
But they will spend more now to try and put more people on to so call bandaid the current module as perceived holes. That is what is wrong with corporate society today.
Why dont they do their base education on rights and wrongs, put it in their contracts, make them read it and if they stuff up the NRL / club penalties are more severe. That is the best education.

But why do the clubs have to get involved with anything outside of looking after the welfare of their player and sponsors until the court process is over when a criminal or civil incident occurs
Why do they have to make press conferences about the incident. It should be the NRL and if a player is guilty of something it is the NRL that make the press conference about the punishment as per breach of contract standards.
And these clubs reaching out to the alledged victims. (Dylan Walker case - Lyall Gorman said he tried to ring the alledged victim 4 times). It is nothing to do with the clubs. Why would an alledged victim want to talk to the club anyway. Just my opinion.

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

In the hopes of giving everyone a better understanding of Jack de Belin’s current situation, below I have provided:

I. A copy of the offence that he was charged with on 13 December 2018;

II. The elements of the offence (i.e., a step-by-step description of what the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt); and

III. Alternative verdicts to the offence.

(Please note: At this stage he has been charged with one count of ‘s 61JA aggravated sexual assault in company’. When he appears in Wollongong Local Court on Tuesday 12 February 2019 the form of the indictment will state if he has been charged with:

- s 61JA(a)(i) aggravated sexual assault in company—inflict actual bodily harm; and/or

- s 61JA(a)(ii) aggravated sexual assault in company—threaten to inflict actual bodily harm; and/or

- s 61JA(a)(iii) aggravated sexual assault in company—deprive victim of his/her liberty,

as such, I have provided the elements to all three offences s 61JA(a)(i), s 61JA(a)(ii), and s 61JA(a)(iii)).

I. THE OFFENCE

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA Aggravated sexual assault in company

61JA (1) A person:

(a) who has sexual intercourse with another person without the consent of the other person and who knows that the other person does not consent to the sexual intercourse, and

(b) who is in the company of another person or persons, and

(c) who:

(i) at the time of, or immediately before or after, the commission of the offence, intentionally or recklessly inflicts actual bodily harm on the alleged victim or any other person who is present or nearby, or

(ii) at the time of, or immediately before or after, the commission of the offence, threatens to inflict actual bodily harm on the alleged victim or any other person who is present or nearby or by means of an offensive weapon or instrument, or

(iii) deprives the alleged victim of his or her liberty for a period before or after the commission of the offence,

Is liable to imprisonment for life.

(2) A person sentenced to imprisonment for life for an offence under this section is to serve that sentence for the term of the person’s natural life.

(3) Nothing in this section affects the operation of section 21 General power to reduce penalties of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) (which authorises the passing of a lesser sentence than imprisonment for life).

(4) Nothing in this section affects the prerogative of mercy.

II. THE ELEMENTS

The elements of the offence are –

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(i) Inflict actual bodily harm

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) immediately before, at the time of, or immediately after the sexual intercourse, the accused inflicted actual bodily harm upon that person or any other person who was present or nearby; and

(6) this infliction of actual bodily harm was done maliciously.

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(ii) Threaten to inflict actual bodily harm

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) immediately before, at the time of, or immediately after the sexual intercourse the accused threatened to inflict actual bodily harm upon that person or upon any other person that was present or nearby; and

(6) that threat was made by means of an offensive weapon or instrument.

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(iii) Deprive victim of his/her liberty

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) for a period before or after the sexual intercourse the accused deprived the victim of his/her liberty.

III. ALTERNATIVE VERDICTS

If a jury is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of an offence under s 61JA, but is satisfied on the evidence that the accused is guilty of an offence under:

(1) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61I Sexual assault; or

(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61J Aggravated sexual assault; or

(3) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), 66A Sexual intercourse--child under 10; or

(4) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 66C Sexual intercourse--child between 10 and 16,

then that jury may find the accused not guilty of the offence charged, but guilty of the lesser offence: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), 80AB Alternative verdicts.

 

[Old Timer]

In the hopes of giving everyone a better understanding of Jack de Belin’s current situation, below I have provided:

I. A copy of the offence that he was charged with on 13 December 2018;

II. The elements of the offence (i.e., a step-by-step description of what the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt); and

III. Alternative verdicts to the offence.

(Please note: At this stage he has been charged with one count of ‘s 61JA aggravated sexual assault in company’. When he appears in Wollongong Local Court on Tuesday 12 February 2019 the form of the indictment will state if he has been charged with:

- s 61JA(a)(i) aggravated sexual assault in company—inflict actual bodily harm; and/or

- s 61JA(a)(ii) aggravated sexual assault in company—threaten to inflict actual bodily harm; and/or

- s 61JA(a)(iii) aggravated sexual assault in company—deprive victim of his/her liberty,

as such, I have provided the elements to all three offences s 61JA(a)(i), s 61JA(a)(ii), and s 61JA(a)(iii)).

I. THE OFFENCE

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA Aggravated sexual assault in company

61JA (1) A person:

(a) who has sexual intercourse with another person without the consent of the other person and who knows that the other person does not consent to the sexual intercourse, and

(b) who is in the company of another person or persons, and

(c) who:

(i) at the time of, or immediately before or after, the commission of the offence, intentionally or recklessly inflicts actual bodily harm on the alleged victim or any other person who is present or nearby, or

(ii) at the time of, or immediately before or after, the commission of the offence, threatens to inflict actual bodily harm on the alleged victim or any other person who is present or nearby or by means of an offensive weapon or instrument, or

(iii) deprives the alleged victim of his or her liberty for a period before or after the commission of the offence,

Is liable to imprisonment for life.

(2) A person sentenced to imprisonment for life for an offence under this section is to serve that sentence for the term of the person’s natural life.

(3) Nothing in this section affects the operation of section 21 General power to reduce penalties of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) (which authorises the passing of a lesser sentence than imprisonment for life).

(4) Nothing in this section affects the prerogative of mercy.

II. THE ELEMENTS

The elements of the offence are –

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(i) Inflict actual bodily harm

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) immediately before, at the time of, or immediately after the sexual intercourse, the accused inflicted actual bodily harm upon that person or any other person who was present or nearby; and

(6) this infliction of actual bodily harm was done maliciously.

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(ii) Threaten to inflict actual bodily harm

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) immediately before, at the time of, or immediately after the sexual intercourse the accused threatened to inflict actual bodily harm upon that person or upon any other person that was present or nearby; and

(6) that threat was made by means of an offensive weapon or instrument.

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61JA(1)(a)(iii) Deprive victim of his/her liberty

(1) The accused had sexual intercourse with the victim; and

(2) that sexual intercourse occurred without the consent of the victim; and

(3) the accused knew or was reckless to the lack of consent of the victim to the sexual intercourse; and

(4) the accused was in the company of another person or persons; and

(5) for a period before or after the sexual intercourse the accused deprived the victim of his/her liberty.

III. ALTERNATIVE VERDICTS

If a jury is not satisfied that the accused is guilty of an offence under s 61JA, but is satisfied on the evidence that the accused is guilty of an offence under:

(1) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61I Sexual assault; or

(2) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 61J Aggravated sexual assault; or

(3) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), 66A Sexual intercourse--child under 10; or

(4) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 66C Sexual intercourse--child between 10 and 16,

then that jury may find the accused not guilty of the offence charged, but guilty of the lesser offence: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), 80AB Alternative verdicts.

Illuminating but JDB denies all of it.
So until the evidence is on the table, all the moral carry on is the rant of people who love to point the finger and apportion blame.
They may indeed be proven right but they do not have the right to be judge and jury or pre-empt anything.
No doubt if they are proven wrong they won't apologise to anyone and will use the out clause of "well some men do behave like that"
I thought lynch mobs and kangaroo courts were a thing of the past but the "Yep Lindy did it" crowd are alive and well.