No Bulldogs to be charged ?

[ibeme]

At which point do we start believing that the players' version of events, whatever they may be, could be true? If we look at what we know so far:

- Players claim innocence
- Their phones have been tapped (this led to a player being accused of drug use)
- DNA samples have been provided
- Two lots of interviews have been given, the first scant, and the second (in Orange) fully cooperative.

Yet the police appear not to have enough evidence to charge anyone. Also:

- The club has always said that they believe the players
- Despite newspaper reports, a letter from the Coffs hotel has shot down reports that the Bulldogs were behaving poorly at the nightclub. The NRL was also unable to prove otherwise.
- A doorman at the hotel has given a statement saying that the girl was in a state, throwing herself at one of the players outside the hotel, who was turning down her advances.

Maybe... just maybe, the players version of events are true. And until we know what this version of events are, we can't really judge them other than to say that the code of conduct may have been breached.

 

[LeagueNut]

If the event hadn't happened, there wouldn't have been a story.

:-s

 

[Shifty]

Raider 69 wrote

Of corse this is only my opinion and i could and probably am completly wrong

And therein lies the problem with almost everything you and the media have said about this incident R69. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation, the fact that you have been trying to make a case based on allegations and have been promoting outcomes based on your prejudice means you are guilty of a far worse crime than anything that has been proven against the players.

 

[[furrycat]]

If the event hadn't happened, there wouldn't have been a story.

:-s

I second that :-s emoticon... What kind of dreamland do you live in? The media doesn't publish the facts, they try to catch the eye of the reader so they buy it.

 

[PB]

At which point do we start believing that the players' version of events, whatever they may be, could be true? If we look at what we know so far:

- Players claim innocence
- Their phones have been tapped (this led to a player being accused of drug use)
- DNA samples have been provided
- Two lots of interviews have been given, the first scant, and the second (in Orange) fully cooperative.

Yet the police appear not to have enough evidence to charge anyone. Also:

- The club has always said that they believe the players
- Despite newspaper reports, a letter from the Coffs hotel has shot down reports that the Bulldogs were behaving poorly at the nightclub. The NRL was also unable to prove otherwise.
- A doorman at the hotel has given a statement saying that the girl was in a state, throwing herself at one of the players outside the hotel, who was turning down her advances.

Maybe... just maybe, the players version of events are true. And until we know what this version of events are, we can't really judge them other than to say that the code of conduct may have been breached.

The police in providing their evidence to the DPP were asked by the DPP if they had conducted a "reinactment" soon after the event. This practice (reinacting the crime) is common in such investigations and is done to:

a) try and gain a better idea of potential witnesses,
b) test the validity of the claiments story, and
c) to help know where to look for further evidence.

A pretty important thing to do...
Oops the police forgot to do that.... :shock: #-o

 

[ibeme]

At which point do we start believing that the players' version of events, whatever they may be, could be true? If we look at what we know so far:

- Players claim innocence
- Their phones have been tapped (this led to a player being accused of drug use)
- DNA samples have been provided
- Two lots of interviews have been given, the first scant, and the second (in Orange) fully cooperative.

Yet the police appear not to have enough evidence to charge anyone. Also:

- The club has always said that they believe the players
- Despite newspaper reports, a letter from the Coffs hotel has shot down reports that the Bulldogs were behaving poorly at the nightclub. The NRL was also unable to prove otherwise.
- A doorman at the hotel has given a statement saying that the girl was in a state, throwing herself at one of the players outside the hotel, who was turning down her advances.

Maybe... just maybe, the players version of events are true. And until we know what this version of events are, we can't really judge them other than to say that the code of conduct may have been breached.

The police in providing their evidence to the DPP were asked by the DPP if they had conducted a "reinactment" soon after the event. This practice (reinacting the crime) is common in such investigations and is done to:

a) try and gain a better idea of potential witnesses,
b) test the validity of the claiments story, and
c) to help know where to look for further evidence.

A pretty important thing to do...
Oops the police forgot to do that.... :shock: #-o

They did do it eventually, after the DPP's prompting.

 

[wittyfan]

:blahb: :blahb:

Immoral? Do you know what that is?

Yeah , Bulldogs fans from a certain European country... :roll:

:lol: :lol: :lol: What country is that?

Greece perhaps? ;-)

 

[PB]

At which point do we start believing that the players' version of events, whatever they may be, could be true? If we look at what we know so far:

- Players claim innocence
- Their phones have been tapped (this led to a player being accused of drug use)
- DNA samples have been provided
- Two lots of interviews have been given, the first scant, and the second (in Orange) fully cooperative.

Yet the police appear not to have enough evidence to charge anyone. Also:

- The club has always said that they believe the players
- Despite newspaper reports, a letter from the Coffs hotel has shot down reports that the Bulldogs were behaving poorly at the nightclub. The NRL was also unable to prove otherwise.
- A doorman at the hotel has given a statement saying that the girl was in a state, throwing herself at one of the players outside the hotel, who was turning down her advances.

Maybe... just maybe, the players version of events are true. And until we know what this version of events are, we can't really judge them other than to say that the code of conduct may have been breached.

The police in providing their evidence to the DPP were asked by the DPP if they had conducted a "reinactment" soon after the event. This practice (reinacting the crime) is common in such investigations and is done to:

a) try and gain a better idea of potential witnesses,
b) test the validity of the claiments story, and
c) to help know where to look for further evidence.

A pretty important thing to do...
Oops the police forgot to do that.... :shock: #-o

They did do it eventually, after the DPP's prompting.

Ahh 7 weeks after the event....

Too little too late!

And they shouldnt have needed prompting. Speaking to a friend in the force (no Star Wars gags), it is part of procedure in an investigation into an assault or homicide to conduct a "reinactment"! So how could they just forget to do it or not think it necessairy?

 

[ibeme]

At which point do we start believing that the players' version of events, whatever they may be, could be true? If we look at what we know so far:

- Players claim innocence
- Their phones have been tapped (this led to a player being accused of drug use)
- DNA samples have been provided
- Two lots of interviews have been given, the first scant, and the second (in Orange) fully cooperative.

Yet the police appear not to have enough evidence to charge anyone. Also:

- The club has always said that they believe the players
- Despite newspaper reports, a letter from the Coffs hotel has shot down reports that the Bulldogs were behaving poorly at the nightclub. The NRL was also unable to prove otherwise.
- A doorman at the hotel has given a statement saying that the girl was in a state, throwing herself at one of the players outside the hotel, who was turning down her advances.

Maybe... just maybe, the players version of events are true. And until we know what this version of events are, we can't really judge them other than to say that the code of conduct may have been breached.

The police in providing their evidence to the DPP were asked by the DPP if they had conducted a "reinactment" soon after the event. This practice (reinacting the crime) is common in such investigations and is done to:

a) try and gain a better idea of potential witnesses,
b) test the validity of the claiments story, and
c) to help know where to look for further evidence.

A pretty important thing to do...
Oops the police forgot to do that.... :shock: #-o

They did do it eventually, after the DPP's prompting.

Ahh 7 weeks after the event....

Too little too late!

And they shouldnt have needed prompting. Speaking to a friend in the force (no Star Wars gags), it is part of procedure in an investigation into an assault or homicide to conduct a "reinactment"! So how could they just forget to do it or not think it necessairy?

How do you know it's too little too late? It wasn't done immediately, but who's to say that made a difference?

What are you implying with your other reference?

 

[PB]

No implication. it is simple though. They are either inept or corrupt. Who am i to judge which it is.

 

[Big Mick]

What ever happens, what ever follows from this, lets all just help try to repair the game of Rugby League which was tarnished by this event.

 

[ibeme]

Ineptness is indiscriminant. We don't know which side it has favoured.

As for your alternative, I think you're off by a long way. There's an entire taskforce set up to deal with this investigation.

 

[PB]

I am not saying there is a cover up one way or the other but it is clearly inept or corrupt. They are the only two alternatives i can think of for the way it has been handled.

 

[Shifty]

PB wrote

I am not saying there is a cover up one way or the other but it is clearly inept or corrupt. They are the only two alternatives i can think of for the way it has been handled.

Sounds like a fair assessment of the reporting of what allegedly happened in Coffs Harbour.

 

[RB30DETT]

The Bulldogs will always be guilty in the eyes of some people, but they are not the law, so who cares what they think.

 

[mickdo]

The Bulldogs will always be guilty in the eyes of some people, but they are not the law, so who cares what they think.

Well, I care what they think if it means rugby league suffers as a result. Guilty or not the dogs have brought disrepute to the game. :evil:

 

[Crusader]

Good to see some realistic discussion for a change, about time people relaised that just because this 'goes away', for whatever reason, does not mean there was no wrong-doing. At best they are guilty of misconduct imo.

 

[Dogaholic]

Good to see some realistic discussion for a change, about time people relaised that just because this 'goes away', for whatever reason, does not mean there was no wrong-doing. At best they are guilty of misconduct imo.

Would you consider them guilty of rape if no charges are laid?

 

[gaterooze]

PB, you're not privy to the ins and outs of the investigation, so how can you possibly make a claim that it has been either corrupt or inept? From a few scant details in the papers? Grow up & stop watching so much CSI.

Whatever happens, one side or the other will come out with conspiracy theories. They've already started, obviously...

 

[DJ1]

Innocent until proven guilty.