Russel Packer. Did we dodge a bullet?

[muzby]

Did I ask you for your opinion?
For a bloke that was going to not join me in the swamp you didn’t take long to jump in.
Your assertion “innocent until proven guilty” (= to your lunacy re JDB not being picked in the CS trial) has SFA to do with it as he wisely admitted to his crime and was therefore afforded leniency if the court so decided.
For your information a plea of guilty doesn’t require proof.
The club knew well in advance of his guilt which was never in question.
Want to try again?

Your argument is akin to telling someone they know nothing about physics, but then asking the same person why the apple fell from the tree to the ground.

If you don’t understand the basics of law, don’t try lecture others on the specifics.

The swamp I refer to is your inability to provide a coherent argument without calling names.

 

[Belta]

Damn I need some popcorn.

 

[muzby]

Damn I need some popcorn.

Goddamn you blowins don’t read..

Butter or coloured?

 

[Belta]

Coloured please. I’m in for the long haul. I’ll need the sugar to last the journey

 

[Old Timer]

Your argument is akin to telling someone they know nothing about physics, but then asking the same person why the apple fell from the tree to the ground.

If you don’t understand the basics of law, don’t try lecture others on the specifics.

The swamp I refer to is your inability to provide a coherent argument without calling names.

You are beyond belief
Please explain to me how a guilty plea needs to be proven in a court of law.
Do you need to present evidence to prove your guilt when you have already told everyone including the court that your guilty?

 

[muzby]

You are beyond belief
Please explain to me how a guilty plea needs to be proven in a court of law.

Simple.

You asked for the court’s ruling... Not his plea..

It really can’t be any more simple than that..

Seriously, if you were indeed in the justice system like you claim you were, it could explain a lot of things.

 

[muzby]

Coloured please. I’m in for the long haul. I’ll need the sugar to last the journey

I get you man, I really do..

 

[Old Timer]

Simple.

You asked for the court’s ruling... Not his plea..

It really can’t be any more simple than that..

Seriously, if you were indeed in the justice system like you claim you were, it could explain a lot of things.

You are a complete FW
Where did I ever say I was “in the justice system” as you now claim?
You continue to hi jack a perfectly simple set of posts because you want to appear to be more intelligent than everyone else
As my post was directed to Damo I will now wait until his reply and ignore your constant interjections in the mean time.

 

[muzby]

You are a complete FW
Where did I ever say I was “in the justice system” as you now claim?

Right here:
[QUOTE="Old Timer, post: 13600098, member: 43798”]For the record you prat and if you had bothered to pay attention to earlier posts I have made the company I managed for 30 years was at my instigation involved with a prisoner release programme for some of the longest term and hardened prisoners in NSW corrections.[/QUOTE]

If that wasn’t you saying that, you should probably speak up as someone has clearly hacked your account..

 

[Old Timer]

Right here:
[QUOTE="Old Timer, post: 13600098, member: 43798”]For the record you prat and if you had bothered to pay attention to earlier posts I have made the company I managed for 30 years was at my instigation involved with a prisoner release programme for some of the longest term and hardened prisoners in NSW corrections.

If that wasn’t you saying that, you should probably speak up as someone has clearly hacked your account..[/QUOTE]
That is exactly what I said so how do you construe I am part of the criminal justice system?
It succinctly says myself and the company I managed was involved in a prisoner release programme and that is a fact.
You obviously have no idea how that works so best you find out before drawing such ridiculous conclusions.
Your ability to draw stupid conclusions to foster your own beliefs is beyond comprehension.
Muzby the master builder of straw men.

 

[Como Connection]

What about the silver bullet!
Need more information over here on the Jurassic Coast, East Devon please.
CC

 

[muzby]

That is exactly what I said so how do you construe I am part of the criminal justice system?
It succinctly says myself and the company I managed was involved in a prisoner release programme and that is a fact.

Okay - so a prisoner release program is not a part of the justice system.

Got it.

I’m guessing that 3-star Hotel in Goulburn with all the barbed wire isn’t a part of the system either.

 

[Old Timer]

muzby's latest effort

 

[muzby]

It’s pleasing to see you’ve progressed to pictures.. It makes it more enjoyable for those reading..

So was your company receiving a payment, rebate or other kind of incentive from the department of corrections?

 

[Old Timer]

It’s pleasing to see you’ve progressed to pictures.. It makes it more enjoyable for those reading..

So was your company receiving a payment, rebate or other kind of incentive from the department of corrections?

Typical post by you trying to find a way to cast dispersions upon good people.
As I suggested make some enquiries as to how the system actually works rather than making bold but incorrect statements.
You certainly have a range of tactics at your disposal for trying to get the better of people.
Now you are trying to draw some tenuous link between me & being "in" the justice system in an effort to say that if I was "in" the system then surely I would therefore be aware that your statement that a man who has pled guilty to a charge and informed both the police and the court that he is guilty as charged is in fact not guilty until proven so by the court.
Please explain exactly how the court proves his guilt?
In simple terms the man is guilty as charged and the court then applies the punishment it sees as appropriate.
Your insinuation that the club didn't know he was guilty until the judge said so is completely ludicrous.

 

[muzby]

Typical post by you trying to find a way to cast dispersions upon good people.

I never cast dispersions on good people. I like good people.

As I suggested make some enquiries as to how the system actually works rather than making bold but incorrect statements.

Here’s a fact sheet for you. I’m aware the program has evolved since you were involved in it, however even back then it was a funded arrangement. Please let me know what you believe was incorrect about my statement and I’ll be sure to let the government fix the errors that they have in three legislation.

https://www.correctiveservices.just...CSNSW Fact Sheets/FPI-Overview-Fact-Sheet.pdf


Of course, your next line will be something about me rubbishing the system, so please know I believe it’s actually a great way to get people integrated back into society.

Now you are trying to draw some tenuous link between me & being "in" the justice system in an effort to say that if I was "in" the system then surely I would therefore be aware that your statement that a man who has pled guilty to a charge and informed both the police and the court that he is guilty as charged is in fact not guilty until proven so by the court.

The funded partnership program does form part of the justice system (hence why they call it a partnership program..).

So yes, you were part of the system. Nothing wrong with that, more companies should do it.

Please explain exactly how the court proves his guilt?
In simple terms the man is guilty as charged and the court then applies the punishment it sees as appropriate.

Are we really discussing how a court works?

Really?

Even if you confess everything to the police, you still front up to court are not “guilty” until the magistrate (that’s the man or woman running the whole court bit) says:

“I find the charge proved”

Up until that point, you still have the ability do object to things the prosecution alleges (even if you’ve already entered a guilty plea)

Of course, people who indicate they will plead guilty actually say not guilty when in court, and vice versa..

It’s only once the court convicts you that you are guilty.

It’s basic law, man.. Come on..

Your insinuation that the club didn't know he was guilty until the judge said so is completely ludicrous.

They waited until the conviction to terminate the contract.

What did they do wrong in your eyes?

 

[Old Timer]

I never cast dispersions on good people. I like good people.


Here’s a fact sheet for you. I’m aware the program has evolved since you were involved in it, however even back then it was a funded arrangement. Please let me know what you believe was incorrect about my statement and I’ll be sure to let the government fix the errors that they have in three legislation.

https://www.correctiveservices.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CSNSW Fact Sheets/FPI-Overview-Fact-Sheet.pdf


Of course, your next line will be something about me rubbishing the system, so please know I believe it’s actually a great way to get people integrated back into society.



The funded partnership program does form part of the justice system (hence why they call it a partnership program..).

So yes, you were part of the system. Nothing wrong with that, more companies should do it.



Are we really discussing how a court works?

Really?

Even if you confess everything to the police, you still front up to court are not “guilty” until the magistrate (that’s the man or woman running the whole court bit) says:

“I find the charge proved”

Up until that point, you still have the ability do object to things the prosecution alleges (even if you’ve already entered a guilty plea)

Of course, people who indicate they will plead guilty actually say not guilty when in court, and vice versa..

It’s only once the court convicts you that you are guilty.

It’s basic law, man.. Come on..


They waited until the conviction to terminate the contract.

What did they do wrong in your eyes?

Thanks for the response and good to see you being so consistent.

1. The fact sheet you sent me is not the correct document so please do try a little harder to get the correct paperwork or information.
2. Your question to me re funding / incentive was purely an attempt by you to find some way to say that the system was a benefit to me thus our participation otherwise why ask the question? You could have simply asked how it worked but you couldn't resist the innuendo of the question and now say "more sure do it" as a way to slide out form under. Also interesting how you say more should do it but obviously not for people like AFB eh?
3. The scheme provided no financial benefit to our company and in fact ultimately cost us money but myself and others saw it as a worthwhile project to be involved in. We actually paid wages and entitlements to the Corrective Services Dept in line with all obligations we paid normal employees from outside the system. As we were an over award paying organisation the inmates / Corrective Services Dept whilst in our employ also received that benefit as well. For the record we also had undertaken similar stances with a programme helping long term unemployed to be rehabilitated back into the workplace.
4. We would take on long inmates in their last year (as much as 12 months as little as 3 months) of incarceration to help them rehabilitate back into society and as such the staff constantly turned over and we would then be retraining new inmates. To get a person up to the skill level of others would normally take circa 6 - 12 months so obviously if we had employed other people and kept them long term we would have had higher outputs and less costs. So your tricky little question was based on a false premiss.
5. We provided an outcome to a service provider to the Dept Corrective Services so we were not in fact part of the justice system as you claim albeit we had to be given security clearance to ensure our worthiness as an organisation. I love how you who was never part of it wants to tell someone who was how it works. Laughable.
6. You keep hanging onto the ludicrous notion that AFB was "not guilty" until the judge said so and therefore the club didn't do anything with his contract until that moment. He was guilty the moment he told the club and confessed to the Police. At that very moment if so disposed the Club could have terminated his contract and faced no repercussions from AFB for having done so.
7. Basic law between and employee and employer is if you admit to something and it is considered a breach of contract (as confirmed & stated by Doust) then the employer is entitled to execute any applicable clauses within the contract and doesn't need a court to do so.

Couldn't help yourself with the explanation of who the magistrate is could you, which just underlines your arrogant and posturing disposition.
No doubt your behaviour is designed to infuriate people so they finally drop the matter and go onto something else as no doubt your aim is to defend the club at all costs even in some cases when it is actually not being attacked.
The premiss of all this is was a question was asked as to why we didn't keep AFB and support him and of course you have to defend the clubs ultimate actions and in doing so cast false accusations and draw stupid conclusions as to the reason why the question was in fact asked in the 1st place.

 

[muzby]

Thanks for the response and good to see you being so consistent.

1. The fact sheet you sent me is not the correct document so please do try a little harder to get the correct paperwork or information.
2. Your question to me re funding / incentive was purely an attempt by you to find some way to say that the system was a benefit to me thus our participation otherwise why ask the question? You could have simply asked how it worked but you couldn't resist the innuendo of the question and now say "more sure do it" as a way to slide out form under. Also interesting how you say more should do it but obviously not for people like AFB eh?
3. The scheme provided no financial benefit to our company and in fact ultimately cost us money but myself and others saw it as a worthwhile project to be involved in. We actually paid wages and entitlements to the Corrective Services Dept in line with all obligations we paid normal employees from outside the system. As we were an over award paying organisation the inmates / Corrective Services Dept whilst in our employ also received that benefit as well. For the record we also had undertaken similar stances with a programme helping long term unemployed to be rehabilitated back into the workplace.
4. We would take on long inmates in their last year (as much as 12 months as little as 3 months) of incarceration to help them rehabilitate back into society and as such the staff constantly turned over and we would then be retraining new inmates. To get a person up to the skill level of others would normally take circa 6 - 12 months so obviously if we had employed other people and kept them long term we would have had higher outputs and less costs. So your tricky little question was based on a false premiss.
5. We provided an outcome to a service provider to the Dept Corrective Services so we were not in fact part of the justice system as you claim albeit we had to be given security clearance to ensure our worthiness as an organisation. I love how you who was never part of it wants to tell someone who was how it works. Laughable.
6. You keep hanging onto the ludicrous notion that AFB was "not guilty" until the judge said so and therefore the club didn't do anything with his contract until that moment. He was guilty the moment he told the club and confessed to the Police. At that very moment if so disposed the Club could have terminated his contract and faced no repercussions from AFB for having done so.
7. Basic law between and employee and employer is if you admit to something and it is considered a breach of contract (as confirmed & stated by Doust) then the employer is entitled to execute any applicable clauses within the contract and doesn't need a court to do so.

Couldn't help yourself with the explanation of who the magistrate is could you, which just underlines your arrogant and posturing disposition.
No doubt your behaviour is designed to infuriate people so they finally drop the matter and go onto something else as no doubt your aim is to defend the club at all costs even in some cases when it is actually not being attacked.
The premiss of all this is was a question was asked as to why we didn't keep AFB and support him and of course you have to defend the clubs ultimate actions and in doing so cast false accusations and draw stupid conclusions as to the reason why the question was in fact asked in the 1st place.

You appear rather paranoid..

To help you close the thought loop, the question around payments was to show that the program is considered part of the justice system.

This then highlights that you were indeed part of the justice system (which is what you were disputing).

Which then gets back to the point that someone with experience in the system should understand the basic premise of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (which you were also questioning).

No matter what the confession or statement, for a criminal matter you aren’t legally guilty until the court determines it.


Decriminalised matters such as speeding etc don’t require the same process, which is what you may be thinking of.

But criminal matters require a court.



And again with the club stooge bit.. It really is a baffling thought to think a person would use something like domestic violence as a shield to protect the club’s footballing operations..

I’m not club blind, I went just as hard after Kirisome Ava’a from souffs.

 

[Old Timer]

You appear rather paranoid..

To help you close the thought loop, the question around payments was to show that the program is considered part of the justice system.

This then highlights that you were indeed part of the justice system (which is what you were disputing).

Which then gets back to the point that someone with experience in the system should understand the basic premise of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law (which you were also questioning).

No matter what the confession or statement, for a criminal matter you aren’t legally guilty until the court determines it.


Decriminalised matters such as speeding etc don’t require the same process, which is what you may be thinking of.

But criminal matters require a court.



And again with the club stooge bit.. It really is a baffling thought to think a person would use something like domestic violence as a shield to protect the club’s footballing operations..

I’m not club blind, I went just as hard after Kirisome Ava’a from souffs.

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?
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.
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?
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?
Interesting how you keep bringing it to the DV argument which whilst incredibly important you keep missing the issue with the "breach of contact" clause in his contract.
It is unbelievable that you cannot see that If he breached his contract which he admitted to doing, the club was well within its rights to instantly dismiss him but it chose not to despite his admission being for a DV crime. 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.

 

[True_Believer]

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?
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.
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?
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?
Interesting how you keep bringing it to the DV argument which whilst incredibly important you keep missing the issue with the "breach of contact" clause in his contract.
It is unbelievable that you cannot see that If he breached his contract which he admitted to doing, the club was well within its rights to instantly dismiss him but it chose not to despite his admission being for a DV crime. 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 know I made an assumption in an earlier post, but are we sure he notified the club immediately of his guilt?