Rumours (signings, sackings & other NRL stuff)

[Das Hassler]

I'm not really following the whole Josh Reynolds case etc but is he still with the girlfriend who he allegedly assaulted? From the looks of the video it looks like he's been caught out but surely he knows better than to lose his shit while being recorded?

Pretty sure he's split from his former partner. ..this just looks like he's upset about hus privacy being invaded in some way

 

[Choiboi]

Video doesn't explain anything other than someone being upset. There's no violence, just abit of swearing. Who knows what triggered him before being filmed

 

[The Rosco]

Video doesn't explain anything other than someone being upset. There's no violence, just abit of swearing. Who knows what triggered him before being filmed

Rumour has it . . . allegedly . . . in a drug induced euphoria he was pleasuring himself in the loo while looking at porn on his phone. Allegedly.
Personally, I can't understand why he'd be having a bat to redtube when he's got a semi naked woman in bed. But that's just me. Allegedly.

 

[The unknown]

It was also reported that Reynolds met with the integrity unit HIMSELF before all this stuff came out.

 

[Tigerm]

I don't how you would say and do what's in the video, if you knew it was being filmed, I suspect a rat, unfortunately he will probably be crucified. Just hope he can get past it.

 

[BrotherJim05]

He swore at her when obviously something had happened before that. Big f**king deal. He didn't threaten her, physically assault her... He didn't even make it personal, just swore at her a bunch.

I thought he was being charged with assault? Or is this just completely seperate?

 

[The unknown]

He swore at her when obviously something had happened before that. Big f**king deal. He didn't threaten her, physically assault her... He didn't even make it personal, just swore at her a bunch.

I thought he was being charged with assault? Or is this just completely seperate?

It feels like this could be the same incident, and she just caught the aftermath on camera. No use speculating though, as nobody has nfi what happened.

Surely Foax Sports should get some heat after this though? I’m no legal expert but surely leaking the video to the public is a bit over the top when Reynolds is yet to plead his case

 

[Tigers Tale]

He swore at her when obviously something had happened before that. Big f**king deal. He didn't threaten her, physically assault her... He didn't even make it personal, just swore at her a bunch.

I thought he was being charged with assault? Or is this just completely seperate?

What you say is actually incorrect. As a rule mere words do not constitute an assault but if they are backed up by actions, ie a person standing over you and angrily yelling at you AND they could actually walk forward into that females personal space AND that female is fearful of your words and actions, that is an assault.

Same as you are across a river and you yell something threatening to a bloke....he thinks, well the river is between us, I am not frightened....no assault BUT if the dude is holding a gun which can, but didn't, shoot over the river...you have an assault.

Simple explanation but it may highlight this is a bit more serious than just an angry guy talking to a female. Assaults can be a bit tricky, comes down to the statement obtained by the police and the fear the victim had at the time.

 

[BrotherJim05]

What you say is actually incorrect. As a rule mere words do not constitute an assault but if they are backed up by actions, ie a person standing over you and angrily yelling at you AND they could actually walk forward into that females personal space AND that female is fearful of your words and actions, that is an assault.

Same as you are across a river and you yell something threatening to a bloke....he thinks, well the river is between us, I am not frightened....no assault BUT if the dude is holding a gun which can, but didn't, shoot over the river...you have an assault.

Simple explanation but it may highlight this is a bit more serious than just an angry guy talking to a female. Assaults can be a bit tricky, comes down to the statement obtained by the police and the fear the victim had at the time.

If what you are saying is correct then Reynolds is well and truly f**ked

 

[macnaz]

Fake news ! The NRL integrity unit has already been notified months ago about this video and also the alleged assault . In saying that the NRL has had plenty of time to contemplate whether a stand down of JR is necessary and you would imagine if they deamed the case against him was particularly damming or clear cut they would have acted by now. The video shows zero in regard to what actually took place to trigger the abuse and may actually hinder a fair trial , and also the mental impact the irresponsible release by media may have on him can not be underestimated. In a day and age where bullying on social media etc is frowned apon its about time the media is also held responsible for creating sensationalized headlines above the wellbeing of human life.

 

[Tigerm]

Fake news ! The NRL integrity unit has already been notified months ago about this video and also the alleged assault . In saying that the NRL has had plenty of time to contemplate whether a stand down of JR is necessary and you would imagine if they deamed the case against him was particularly damming or clear cut they would have acted by now. The video shows zero in regard to what actually took place to trigger the abuse and may actually hinder a fair trial , and also the mental impact the irresponsible release by media may have on him can not be underestimated. In a day and age where bullying on social media etc is frowned apon its about time the media is also held responsible for creating sensationalized headlines above the wellbeing of human life.

Yes, but I think now it is out, there will be a ground swell of people saying what a horrible person he was in it and Greenburg will act to the crowd not the facts. I mean it is just a WT's player.

 

[The Charlatan]

Fake news ! The NRL integrity unit has already been notified months ago about this video and also the alleged assault . In saying that the NRL has had plenty of time to contemplate whether a stand down of JR is necessary and you would imagine if they deamed the case against him was particularly damming or clear cut they would have acted by now. The video shows zero in regard to what actually took place to trigger the abuse and may actually hinder a fair trial , and also the mental impact the irresponsible release by media may have on him can not be underestimated. In a day and age where bullying on social media etc is frowned apon its about time the media is also held responsible for creating sensationalized headlines above the wellbeing of human life.

Yes, as I commented in the thread in the NRL section, it's 30 odd seconds of video which give no context on what had happened before or after. It could hinder him receiving a fair trial in regard to the DV and it may prevent a justified outcome, be it in his favour or not. She may have been chipping at him prior to the video, he may have given her a touch up after it, it's all purely speculative which is not helpful and could prejudice the outcome of his trial.

That said, I don't endorse what he said on the video, it's a pretty disgraceful way to talk to someone. I've had arguments with my wife, but it's never got that low, not by a long shot.

 

[The Charlatan]

What you say is actually incorrect. As a rule mere words do not constitute an assault but if they are backed up by actions, ie a person standing over you and angrily yelling at you AND they could actually walk forward into that females personal space AND that female is fearful of your words and actions, that is an assault.

Same as you are across a river and you yell something threatening to a bloke....he thinks, well the river is between us, I am not frightened....no assault BUT if the dude is holding a gun which can, but didn't, shoot over the river...you have an assault.

Simple explanation but it may highlight this is a bit more serious than just an angry guy talking to a female. Assaults can be a bit tricky, comes down to the statement obtained by the police and the fear the victim had at the time.

I wonder if this video is what the DV charges pertain to.

 

[Tiger05]

Fake news ! The NRL integrity unit has already been notified months ago about this video and also the alleged assault . In saying that the NRL has had plenty of time to contemplate whether a stand down of JR is necessary and you would imagine if they deamed the case against him was particularly damming or clear cut they would have acted by now. The video shows zero in regard to what actually took place to trigger the abuse and may actually hinder a fair trial , and also the mental impact the irresponsible release by media may have on him can not be underestimated. In a day and age where bullying on social media etc is frowned apon its about time the media is also held responsible for creating sensationalized headlines above the wellbeing of human life.

I can't get over how f**ked up this is. It shows to me everything that is wrong with the world today and what we as a society have to get on top of.

 

[Old Time Tiger]

I can't get over how f**ked up this is. It shows to me everything that is wrong with the world today and what we as a society have to get on top of.

True but plenty of blame must be directed at social media and journalists, I think it's called the 5th Estate.

People who think they have a right to encroach on other peoples lives. The press should know better (they have to, cough, cough, sturdy journalism cough cough, after all) bloggers etc don't, they are just after instant fame. The Kardashians of this world don't help, the people who follow the likes of them don't help.

Movie, TV and sport people enter those careers because that's what they want to do, what they are good at. Poor ba5tards get hounded by the press.

There's a President who is his own worst enemy because he can't get off social media, it's not good for society (says me as I type on a social forum and hiding behind a false name, what a hypocrite ah !!)

I hate when I read anything in a paper or on line by Staff Writers - gutless so & so's can't even put their names to articles that in many a case, could kill a career.

In the case of Reynolds, I see he has (apparently) put out a cryptic message “Truth. Always. Wins. Unfortunately ... Liars gets their turns first. - sounds like another twist - I hope he sues Fox and their Staff Reporters.

 

[gordsy]

I wonder if this video is what the DV charges pertain to.

No.
Taken from ngm.com.au, a solicitors website

Whosoever assaults any person, and thereby occasions actual bodily harm, shall be liable to imprisonment for five years. If the offence is committed in the company of another person or persons, the accused is liable to imprisonment for seven years.
Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45].

']


Definition of AOABH from google

minor injury, such as bruising, inflicted on a person by the deliberate action of another, considered less serious than grievous bodily harm.

So in short, it may be what led up to the charges or used as evidence to support a pattern of behavior but the video itself doesn't prove the charge, In my opinion that is.


From ngm.com.au [

After negotiations with the Director of Public Prosecutions office, the serious charge of Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent was replaced with Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm and the matter proceeded to a defended hearing in the Local Court instead of going for jury trial. The client raised self defence when he gave evidence. Once self defence is raised, the onus is on the prosecution to establish that the accused did not believe that it was necessary to do what he did in self defence, and that what he did was not reasonable in the circumstances that he found himself in. The charge against our client was dismissed.

Reading this I can see Reynolds using the Inglis defence

 

[gordsy]

Double post

 

[macnaz]

The video can actually portray Reynolds as the victim ..so I cant see it providing much for either party to be honest, purely and simply published for media attention with zero regard for the people involved.

 

[The Rosco]

No.
Taken from ngm.com.au, a solicitors website
gordsy said:

Whosoever assaults any person, and thereby occasions actual bodily harm, shall be liable to imprisonment for five years. If the offence is committed in the company of another person or persons, the accused is liable to imprisonment for seven years.
Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45].

Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45].

']

'] Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45]. [/QUOTE]']
Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45]. [/QUOTE]']
Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45]. [/QUOTE]'] Section 59 does not define actual bodily harm, however typical examples of injuries that are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm include scratches and bruises: McIntyre v R (2009) 198 A Crim R 549 at [44]. Not only is the degree of violence involved considered, but also the actual damage that occurred. For example a person may push another, with the result that the person falls on their head and sustains very serious injuries. [QUOTE ] Actual bodily harm may also have been occasioned where a victim has been injured psychologically in a very serious way, going beyond merely transient emotions, feelings and states of mind: Li v R [2005] NSWCCA 442 at [45]. [/QUOTE]']


Definition of AOABH from google


So in short, it may be what led up to the charges or used as evidence to support a pattern of behavior but the video itself doesn't prove the charge, In my opinion that is.


From ngm.com.au [

Reading this I can see Reynolds using the Inglis defence[/quote][/QUOTE]
. . The Inglis defence ? as in I couldn't hear what I was screaming at her because it was raining ?
I'll see myself out.

 

[gordsy]

The Inglis defence ? as in I couldn't hear what I was screaming at her because it was raining ?
I'll see myself out.

Gold