Russel Packer. Did we dodge a bullet?

[muzby]

Of course muzby you must be correct and I must be wrong and I should have listened to you when you were at the table with me and our BOD when all the relationships, areas of responsibilities, reporting and how that all worked re the prisoner release program were discussed and the paperwork signed off.
Yep we were clearly "in" the judicial system as you claim because you have been involved in exactly the same programme haven't you Mr Google?

Well there you go.. Glad after all these years you’ve found out something new..

Of course one must now also draw the conclusion from your succinct interpretation of the law that if anyone confesses to an illegal action to his employer and that action clearly breaches an employment contract between the parties, the employer can do nothing whatsoever until such times as the matter goes to court and has a pronouncement of guilty from the magistrate or judge. Not guilty until the gabble has dropped you say.

That’s a broad generalisation, however as with any terminaton of an employment contract for disciplinary reasons there would need to be sufficient evidence.

And if a person was sacked for something that it turns out they didn’t do, it leaves the employer wide open.

BTW, It’s ‘gavel’..

So now it looks like the employer must operate under the rules that the employee who has stated clearly he has breached his contract might indeed be lying and may come to his senses and deny the very thing he admitted to.
Yep that all makes sense and i'm sure the courts can't wait for that to all take place.
You cant be for real surely?

There are plenty of cases where defendants change their plea, and for varying reasons.

For example one such possibly extreme reason can involve blackmail and extortion.

It’s why we wait for the court process to play out as there is plenty going on in both sides and some parts may not be true. Most magistrates are smart, rational people who can see through things pretty clearly.

So if AFB's partner had decided to withdraw the charges he pleaded guilty to and decided she did'nt want it to go to court, was he guilty or not guilty to that which he confessed to?

He would be considered not guilty in the eyes of the law.

Again, legal 1.01...

If a DV crime is so abhorrent to you why do you not question the fact they didn't sack him instantly?
The club didn't have to wait 6 months for a court hearing it is that simple.

I’ll trade you an AFB and give you an SKD...

Again, it all comes down to the court’s decision as to what move we should make.

Standing down whilst the matter proceeds is a suitable outcome for everyone.

 

[muzby]

I know I made an assumption in an earlier post, but are we sure he notified the club immediately of his guilt?

He admitted it to the judge, he says so himself.

So it was at the court case, not before..

OT is getting his timeline out of whack..

 

[Old Timer]

I know I made an assumption in an earlier post, but are we sure he notified the club immediately of his guilt?

That is my understanding of the situation and have no reason to think otherwise.
The club stood him down immediately, so why would they do that without consultation?

 

[Old Timer]

Well there you go.. Glad after all these years you’ve found out something new..

Yep found out that you know SFA how the system actually works and you continue to go down your incorrect path.

That’s a broad generalisation, however as with any terminaton of an employment contract for disciplinary reasons there would need to be sufficient evidence.

And if a person was sacked for something that it turns out they didn’t do, it leaves the employer wide open.

So admitting crime is not enough evidence for you then what is? Everything needs a court trial?

BTW, It’s ‘gavel’..

Always the pedant even for a simple typo what a champion you really are.


There are plenty of cases where defendants change their plea, and for varying reasons.

For example one such possibly extreme reason can involve blackmail and extortion.

It’s why we wait for the court process to play out as there is plenty going on in both sides and some parts may not be true. Most magistrates are smart, rational people who can see through things pretty clearly.

A breach of employment contract termination which is clearly what the club could have, but chose initially not to do does not need a court determination. You keep beetling on about the court but for the club to sack him it did not need a court determination despite all your rhetoric which is indeed the very heart of this entire conversation.

He would be considered not guilty in the eyes of the law.

Again, legal 1.01...

What would he be in your eyes muzby and would you want him playing for your club? Your stance is not really about the law it is about having a person who committed DV playing for your club because the law can't actually stop him from doing that. Under your current stance we could theoretically have a lot of players committing DV and if their partners don't come forward and the matter doesn't go before a court somehow they are all innocent in your eyes even if people know that not to be true.

I’ll trade you an AFB and give you an SKD...

Again, it all comes down to the court’s decision as to what move we should make.

Standing down whilst the matter proceeds is a suitable outcome for everyone.

More clouding of the waters by now introducing SKD. AFB said he was guilty, get that through your head, guilty, SKD did not say he was guilty and was proven to be innocent.
You seem to want to find a way for AFB to be found innocent despite his honesty in pleading guilty and his desire to face the consequences of the judicial system for his actions.
Curious you want to stamp out DV and want people to be held accountable and dealt with severely for DV but when a bloke openly admits it you try to find a cop out for not taking immediate action.

 

[muzby]

More clouding of the waters by now introducing SKD. AFB said he was guilty, get that through your head, guilty, SKD did not say he was guilty and was proven to be innocent.
You seem to want to find a way for AFB to be found innocent despite his honesty in pleading guilty and his desire to face the consequences of the judicial system for his actions.
Curious you want to stamp out DV and want people to be held accountable and dealt with severely for DV but when a bloke openly admits it you try to find a cop out for not taking immediate action.

Shouting now?

Yes, AFB said he was guilty - to the judge.

It was only then that action should be taken.

I’ve shown you SKD as to why the club needs to wait until the court makes its decision..

As I’ve reiterated to you over the past 300 pages of this thread, it’s all about allowing the correct legal process to happen.

 

[Old Timer]

I know I made an assumption in an earlier post, but are we sure he notified the club immediately of his guilt?

Hi T B
Sorry for the delay in getting back but I see others have jumped in to answer the question you asked of me.
No doubt you can make an informed decision after reading the clubs statement which is attached below.
muzby would have you believe that from the date of the clubs initial announcement until the court date nobody knew that AFB said he was guilty despite the police investigation, the clubs investigation, the NRL's investigation and the fact that the matter was listed for court where I suggest preliminary pleadings would have been discussed.
Evidently they had no real knowledge of anything until the court date but they arranged counselling to take place immediately. They must have used a psychic to work out exactly what counselling was required because nobody knew anything or maybe they thought that everybody needed some and just included AFB for good measure.
It must have come as an incredible shock to all and sundry when he said he was guilty which evidently according to muzzy only happened on the day he went to court.
Anyway I am sure you can draw your own conclusions as to what transpired.

"CLUB NEWS

Club Statement: Addin Fonua-Blake
Author
dragons.com.au
Timestamp
Mon 19 Jan 2015, 11:00 AM
Share on social media

• Share via Facebook
• Share via Twiiter
• Share via Reddit
• Share via Email

The St George Illawarra Dragons were made aware on Monday that National Youth Competition contracted player Addin Fonua-Blake was charged by the Police, overnight, with Common Assault.

As a result, the Club has stood Fonua-Blake down from club activities, effective immediately and until further notice for breaching the Club’s Code of Conduct.

The NRL's Integrity Unit has been informed and the Club has arranged counselling.

The matter will go to court at the end of this month and with respect to the judicial system, the Club will not be making any further comment."

 

[muzby]

Hi T B
Sorry for the delay in getting back but I see others have jumped in to answer the question you asked of me.
No doubt you can make an informed decision after reading the clubs statement which is attached below.
muzby would have you believe that from the date of the clubs initial announcement until the court date nobody knew that AFB said he was guilty despite the police investigation, the clubs investigation, the NRL's investigation and the fact that the matter was listed for court where I suggest preliminary pleadings would have been discussed.
Evidently they had no real knowledge of anything until the court date but they arranged counselling to take place immediately. They must have used a psychic to work out exactly what counselling was required because nobody knew anything or maybe they thought that everybody needed some and just included AFB for good measure.
It must have come as an incredible shock to all and sundry when he said he was guilty which evidently according to muzzy only happened on the day he went to court.
Anyway I am sure you can draw your own conclusions as to what transpired.

"CLUB NEWS

Club Statement: Addin Fonua-Blake
Author
dragons.com.au
Timestamp
Mon 19 Jan 2015, 11:00 AM
Share on social media

• Share via Facebook
• Share via Twiiter
• Share via Reddit
• Share via Email

The St George Illawarra Dragons were made aware on Monday that National Youth Competition contracted player Addin Fonua-Blake was charged by the Police, overnight, with Common Assault.

As a result, the Club has stood Fonua-Blake down from club activities, effective immediately and until further notice for breaching the Club’s Code of Conduct.

The NRL's Integrity Unit has been informed and the Club has arranged counselling.

The matter will go to court at the end of this month and with respect to the judicial system, the Club will not be making any further comment."

You should probably read the final paragraph of the club statement again...

 

[True_Believer]

That is my understanding of the situation and have no reason to think otherwise.
The club stood him down immediately, so why would they do that without consultation?

Just wondering if there was anything that confirmed the timing. When I made the assumption it was based purely on timing - but reading further into it, it could be interpreted differently. The choice to stand him down may purely have been a case of erring on the side of caution and waiting until the case was heard. The basis for the stand down may have been initiated with the partners accusation - nothing more.

In fact, that makes more sense to me given we held on for 6 months.

 

[muzby]

Actually curious OT..

You were frustrated, swearing and name calling about people not wanting to stand by AFB after he had been convicted..

But now you want him sacked immediately before any conviction..


Why the change of heart?

 

[muzby]

Just wondering if there was anything that confirmed the timing. When I made the assumption it was based purely on timing - but reading further into it, it could be interpreted differently. The choice to stand him down may purely have been a case of erring on the side of caution and waiting until the case was heard. The basis for the stand down may have been initiated with the partners accusation - nothing more.

In fact, that makes more sense to me given we held on for 6 months.

That is precisely it..

 

[True_Believer]

Hi T B
Sorry for the delay in getting back but I see others have jumped in to answer the question you asked of me.
No doubt you can make an informed decision after reading the clubs statement which is attached below.
muzby would have you believe that from the date of the clubs initial announcement until the court date nobody knew that AFB said he was guilty despite the police investigation, the clubs investigation, the NRL's investigation and the fact that the matter was listed for court where I suggest preliminary pleadings would have been discussed.
Evidently they had no real knowledge of anything until the court date but they arranged counselling to take place immediately. They must have used a psychic to work out exactly what counselling was required because nobody knew anything or maybe they thought that everybody needed some and just included AFB for good measure.
It must have come as an incredible shock to all and sundry when he said he was guilty which evidently according to muzzy only happened on the day he went to court.
Anyway I am sure you can draw your own conclusions as to what transpired.

"CLUB NEWS

Club Statement: Addin Fonua-Blake
Author
dragons.com.au
Timestamp
Mon 19 Jan 2015, 11:00 AM
Share on social media

• Share via Facebook
• Share via Twiiter
• Share via Reddit
• Share via Email

The St George Illawarra Dragons were made aware on Monday that National Youth Competition contracted player Addin Fonua-Blake was charged by the Police, overnight, with Common Assault.

As a result, the Club has stood Fonua-Blake down from club activities, effective immediately and until further notice for breaching the Club’s Code of Conduct.

The NRL's Integrity Unit has been informed and the Club has arranged counselling.

The matter will go to court at the end of this month and with respect to the judicial system, the Club will not be making any further comment."

Somehow didn't see this post until after I'd posted the other response.

Either way, I don't think there's enough information to be certain. I certainly can't stand here with my hand on my heart and say one way or another that the club knew the situation from the get go - there's too many variables or possible scenarios.

I did find some info today (which I don't have with me), but it indicated the role of the integrity unit. Essentially, the integrity unit waits for the club to hand out their punishment, and if they aren't happy with it, they impose their own actions. Given the results of all proven guilty domestic violence cases involving players has resulted in contract termination (at least the ones I am aware of), I'd be more confident in believing that either the integrity unit has mandated that the only punishment in these cases is termination OR they are influencing them as they occur.

 

[Old Timer]

Actually curious OT..

You were frustrated, swearing and name calling about people not wanting to stand by AFB after he had been convicted..

But now you want him sacked immediately before any conviction..


Why the change of heart?

For one that professes to be so smart you are awfully stupid at working things out.
I have never said that I wanted him sacked that is you yet again drawing a wrong conclusion.

 

[Old Timer]

Somehow didn't see this post until after I'd posted the other response.

Either way, I don't think there's enough information to be certain. I certainly can't stand here with my hand on my heart and say one way or another that the club knew the situation from the get go - there's too many variables or possible scenarios.

I did find some info today (which I don't have with me), but it indicated the role of the integrity unit. Essentially, the integrity unit waits for the club to hand out their punishment, and if they aren't happy with it, they impose their own actions. Given the results of all proven guilty domestic violence cases involving players has resulted in contract termination (at least the ones I am aware of), I'd be more confident in believing that either the integrity unit has mandated that the only punishment in these cases is termination OR they are influencing them as they occur.

The police pressed charges and within 24 hours the club makes an announcement they have immediately stood a player down and that he was instantly referred him to counselling.
Surely it is not too hard to imagine that prior to that announcement that someone within the legal team at the club would have suggested we better talk to AFB to find out exactly what the charges are and if they are true.
These type of occurrences between employees and employer's don't happen without very careful consideration.
If AFB said, no they are not true, then why stand him down and refer him to counselling and you have to ask exactly what counselling was he referred to and if he wasn't guilty why the hell would he attend it?
A bloke with his background ( as per his own recent statement) could have just easily said stick it in your arse and you go I'm out of here.
If he said the charges are correct and I did do this terrible thing then IMO the club had 2 viable options

1. Sack him immediately and let the court system deal with it and play no further part in it.
2. Stand him down, get involved in his rehabilitation (which appears to be what initially happened) and continue working with him as you wouldn't have done it in the 1st place if you thought it wasn't worth it.

The club curiously IMO chose to get involved (tick from me) however when the sentence (which was very light IMO) was handed down they became Pontious Pilate and washed their hands of him.
Why would you do it for 6 months and then stop it at a time when most needed it beggars belief to me.
muzby would still have you believe the club didn't know he was guilty until he stood up in the court which is either complete rubbish or shows that our management are even greater dopes and incompetents than people believe them to be.
Stand a player down, send him for counselling all on suspicion FMD it is just beyond belief people can even think that.
Of course part of the exercise in evaluating this case is why did he get such a light penalty from the court as such light penalties are normally only handed down for people who show contrition and remorse.
Do you think that if AFB had of kept saying for 6 months "no I'm innocent" to the police, his lawyers, his employer and the court and then at 1 minute to midnight he says no I'm actually guilty that his actions would been considered contrite and remorseful?

 

[The Damo]

Damo,
You are a good thinker and remove emotion from most things so perhaps you can offer an opinion on this.
Just before we get to that I should say categorically I abhor DV and do not in any way shape or form condone or excuse it as my stand with almost all violent acts regardless of who they are perpetrated on.
I do also declare that I am a person who believes in rehabilitating people so therefore in believing that if given the chance people should have active involvement.
Now with that out of the way I go back to the AFB situation.

• AFB perpetrates an act of DV and admits to it.
• The club stands him down immediately (including form the player group I think)
• With an admission of guilt already made the die is cast that he will be punished by the judicial system.
• We have some involvement with him in the 6 months leading up to the court case with the result in fact a no brainer only severity in question.
• The court hands out what can be considered a very light slap on the wrist penalty of $1,000 fine and a 12 mont suspended sentence and some counselling.
• The club the trips up his contract and turf him.

My question / dilemma is if the club new he was guilty why did the club wait for the court ruling to terminate the contract surely they already knew the result.
Is it possible that the club may have waited to that moment just in case the case was withdrawn or AFB changed his plea?
Some people are suggesting the Packer case was different because he had served his custodial sentence well the fact is AFB didn't have a sentence to serve as such and the court in its “wisdom@ let him go about his business.
Now whilst I believe in rehabilitation where possible I could actually understand if the club had of cut AFB loose the moment he admitted to the DV crime but what was the point in waiting 6 months to tear up the contract?
As I have suggested in previous posts IMO seeing they held onto him for that period of time then why consign him to there scrap heap at the very time he and his family probably needed us most?
I can see no good logic for keeping someone who you know is guilty of a crime, doing some work with him but then cast him adrift.
If the conviction of the club was not to tolerate such action then surely it should have torn up the contract day 1?
It could have done that and still offered counselling.
If it was me in charge I would have looked for the pathway to rehabilitate him, keep within the group he knew best and have very strong penalty clauses against him if he f**ked up again.

I’ll give it a go, thanks.
First I’d just note that I didn’t know he’d admitted guilt when charged and stood down before his conviction and sentencing. If that’s so it might be that the contract only allows termination on conviction, so the club legally had to wait till then. I genuinely don’t know if that’s the case though.

I guess the basic principles I agree with are -
- A conviction for kicking your pregnant wife/DV is definitely just cause to terminate a football contract, and I’d expect that standard to be universal.
- everyone deserves the chance to make full amends for their wrongdoing, and assisting someone to do so is a noble act. However it’s not an obligation to do so in most circumstances, it’s not necessarily a negative act to decline to do so, the obligation is on the wrongdoer.
- part of the amends should be proportional punishment.

So I’m completely ok with the club terminating his contract on conviction. To properly judge what happened next I’d have to to know the circumstances better. I don’t know if the club just washed their hands of he and his family, or if they’d had ongoing discussions with him and decided he wasn’t exhibiting a good attitude to making amends, or if they’d offered some kind of ongoing assistance and he had told them he wanted a full clean break from the environment he’d offended in. All seem possible.
And while I think it would be a good thing if the club had worked with him if he and his wife wanted that and he showed the right attitude towards it, as you’d have attempted. I don’t think it would reflect negatively on them if they decided they’d fulfilled their obligations and left it at that.

 

[True_Believer]

The police pressed charges and within 24 hours the club makes an announcement they have immediately stood a player down and that he was instantly referred him to counselling.
Surely it is not too hard to imagine that prior to that announcement that someone within the legal team at the club would have suggested we better talk to AFB to find out exactly what the charges are and if they are true.
These type of occurrences between employees and employer's don't happen without very careful consideration.
If AFB said, no they are not true, then why stand him down and refer him to counselling and you have to ask exactly what counselling was he referred to and if he wasn't guilty why the hell would he attend it?

It's also not hard to image that the club stood him down for his safety and state of mind, for the reputation of the club and to make sure there were no repercussions on either side. As I said, it could also have been at the recommendation of the integrity unit. As for the counselling, I'm not sure that's relevant - it's been reported that JDB has been getting counselling from the get go and he's claimed innocence.

You also seem to be ignoring the potential influence of the integrity unit. For all we know, the club may have had the intentions of keeping AFB. Once the case was heard and he was found guilty (irrespective of whether it was known or not) the integrity unit stepped in and forced the clubs hand. As I've pointed out, every DV case that I'm aware of since around 2015 has resulted in exactly the same outcome - contract termination. It's not like the club stands out in this decision. There was a marked change in direction from the NRL at this time - there was significant outcry in the media for the way the NRL handled DV cases (following the Kenny-Dowall case).

I get the feeling you want to find some element of blame with the club. And that's fine, that's your prerogative. I personally can't, no matter which way I look at it.

Irrespective of the details, in my opinion, the right outcome was achieved.

 

[muzby]

For one that professes to be so smart you are awfully stupid at working things out.
I have never said that I wanted him sacked that is you yet again drawing a wrong conclusion.

Interesting..

So if you don’t want him sacked, why are you pushing so hard to say the club should have acted before the conviction?

 

[avocado]

Muzby and Old Timer. Seriously guys. Give it a rest.

 

[muzby]

Muzby and Old Timer. Seriously guys. Give it a rest.

Can we fire it up again after the weekend?

 

[avocado]

Sure.

 

[muzby]

Sure.

Excellent