You don't get to thumb your nose at the judgement of the court, just because you haven't bothered to get a job. If he had got a job and attempted to make some form of payment, he might have an argument.
Your attempt to slander the victims of the crime is irrelevant to this.
It's great that your sympathetic to an adult male invading someone's home and threatening a nine year old kid, but that doesn't mean the rest of society will be.
Our game gets yet another black eye, because Bennett can't be f**ked acting in it's best interests.
Who said I am sympathetic to Lodge. I think it was a reprehensible, irresponsible and fundamentally stupid act by him, which appeared to be a continuation of behavioral problems he had been showing. If you know from previous incidences that you have a problem on the piss, don't drink. Quite simple. Did he deserve to be punished, absolutely.
The difference between you and me and people like Razor is that:
(a) I believe that those in the best position to make a determination as to what constituted appropriate punishment for the criminality involved are the legal professionals in the jurisdiction where the offence occurred. If you disagree with me that professionals with the appropriate legal qualifications and years of experience are better placed to determine what is appropriate in the circumstances, compared to a bunch of keyboard warriors on the other side of the world, we will just have to agree to disagree;
(b) Lodge, having completed the terms of his plea agreement, is entitled to get on with his life. Or is your concept of the criminal justice system is that someone can continue to be punished for the same crime after they have completed the punishment mandated by the court, you are seeking to overturn hundreds and hundreds of years of common law and statutory principles;
(c) If you believe the he has not been adequately punished, is that Lodge's fault? That is something that you all should be taking up with the authorities in New York;
(d) If you have a problem with him being re-registered, that is a decision that has been made by the NRL with full knowledge of his circumstances. If you all have an issue with that, write your letters of complaint to the NRL or Todd Greenburg. I note that the manner in which they have handled Lodge's case is consistent with the manner in which they have addressed issues with Carney in the past, Packer, Wicks etc.;
(e) Which leads me to the conclusion that this confected outrage that is occurring via a clearly media driven campaign, primarily is occurring because of the club he has been signed by.
Interesting, that you do not answer the question that I posed. I will do so again. Did you have the capacity at 21/22 to pay a judgment of $1.6 million?
How do you propose he satisfy the judgment if he has no capacity to pay it? He offered to take out a loan, to give them something, they refused. That is their right. Perhaps they are playing the waiting game to see if he does start earning big dollars? The difficult scenario for them is, that in all likelihood that judgment is not enforceable in Australia. They may have to make a judgment call one day whether a percentage of the award is better than nothing.
Further, are you seriously suggesting that if you were in Lodge's shoes with a $1.6M judgment against you that you would not seek to negotiate a better outcome for yourself? If you contend that you would simply pay the damages, I believe you to be a liar.
In the same scenario in Australia, would they have received $1.6M, no way known would that have happened. In total the three plaintiffs would have been lucky to receive $300,00 to $400,000 AUD. A more likely total would have been $200,000.00. I believe that the damages awarded were excessive in the circumstances, that is my view on the information I have about the circumstances involved on the night in question.
