Wes in trouble... again

[Dave Q]

The matter will have to be PROVED BEYOND " REASONABLE " DOUBT.

Correct if he pleads not guilty and contests the charges.

The evidence rests on the DATE the photo's were taken ( can it be proved that the photo's in question were taken after the disqualification date or prior to it ). Dates, landmarks in the background, circumstantial evidence Re witnessess seeing him at a certain place wearing same clothes as in photot ETc !!!

Yes, sort of, but also include the direct evidence of people who actually saw him drive. If a club member saw him drive last week when the order is in place, he may have committed the same offence on mulitple occasions.
Very serious. Those members who have spoken out now about warnings etc- may have got him in more trouble.

It also STRONGLY relies on his personal honestly, and the honesty of others in the vehicle with him at the time ETC !!! Now if he lies about the incident and comes unstuck well he would definately be in some shart with the club and authorities, whereas if he admits to it, he is also in the shart. Tough situation for him for sure !!

If he pleads guilty, yes he is in trouble. If he pleads not guilty, his evidence will be tested in court.

I would say he would be looking at weekend detention at the least, however if he has a GOOD record he may get away with some other form of communtity service.

Unlikley, his record is not especially clean I am led to believe anyway.

Not looking good for him either way unfortunately, a 2 to 3 mth term is NOT out of the question either ( at a low security prision such as Silverwater ).

Incorrect.

If he does lie, will the occupants ( one being a singer ??? ) risk their own careers by backing up that lie. It would have been easier for him if he was by himself, then it would be his word against a filthy scum reporter !! Instantly giving a REASONABLE DOUBT !!!

He might be truthful. A reporter can be a good witness.

If a party lies, they may face charges. It all might assist their careers though. Its a strange world we live in.

Now it would be just a matter of finding some witnessess at the club/restaurant that he had just left ( waiters staff etc ) interview them as to times, clothes worn ETC ( even meals ordered etc ) then the ball of " Wes in the shart " will really gain momentum.

Did they see him drive? Clothes is not good enough. Another patron may have worn the same outfit or close thereto.

Shame though. I always rated him as a player !!

100% correct.

Nice post.

 

[gregstar]

if it's true.


sack him.


you can't keep avoiding your responsibilty. no matter how many chances he's given, he'll respond the same way because the punishment hasn't been enough for him to learn from.

saints are helping him by sacking him - he needs to grow up.

if it's true - sack him.

 

[Willow]

Unfortunately, there is a serious side to all this. Wes does have a rottern driving record in a country where the road toll is no laughing matter. The authorities are under constant pressure to be seen to be doing something about it.

The obligation on young sportspeople (particularly young men) to set an example is nothing new, but there seems to be more scrutiny being placed on them than ever before. If he does have a case to answer, its likely Wes will find himself on the outer, regardless of the legalities.

 

[2 True Blues]

Suspended and Disqualified drivers are like the stars in the sky anyway. Whatever they do to him will have ZERO effect on those that will still choose to drive whilst disqualified in the future. Making an example/scapegoat out of him over this would be ridiculously futile and will serve to achieve absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Like I said, a shame really.......Hope for his sake the magistrate made a morning visit to the toilets at Wynyard Station and caught up with some associates, and as such is in a good mood on the hearing day.

 

[Southernsaint]

We’d be screaming blue murder & expecting the full effect of the law to be brought down upon him if he played for any other club.

If guilty, it’s his FOURTH wasted “final chance” & a slap in the face to the club that has stood by him.

 

[Mong]

Conflicted..

I am the first to call for tougher penalties for traffic offences and jail time for repeat offenders. Unfortuantly if Jail is what it takes to get it through his head that he can't do it then jail it should be.. This should apply to everyone in society, locking nim up just because he is in the public eye when others are not i don't agree with.

I'd hate to see Saints sack him and him end up at the scummers or any other club.. How is that a penalty to him??

 

[Follow Me Up To Carlton]

We’d be screaming blue murder & expecting the full effect of the law to be brought down upon him if he played for any other club.

I wouldn't give a sh*te.

If guilty, it’s his FOURTH wasted “final chance” & a slap in the face to the club that has stood by him.

I'm all for the "no dickheads" policy that the swans and Kings claim has been a factor in their success, but it'd have to be across the board... first out the door would be Mark Gasnier if we're fair dinkium...

 

[Dave Q]

Its good to draw out the prospectives lessons and views in all this.

If he's guilty and his form is as poor as beleived (has anybody here seen his trafiic or criminal record?), the court punishment is bound to override anything the club may have in store for him. He cant play footy if he is locked up.

But should some kind of "secondary" boycott be placed on a player by the NRL itself? Why should Cronulla or the Roosters or a Melbourne be able to pick up a player who has been sacked for disciplinary reasons? Who benefits then?

There should be "prefect rule" It should state that if a club officer suspects that a player is committing a criminal offence or disobeying a court order, that officer must report that suspicion to the NRL. The judiciary could read the complaint on a quiet day.

Then they could discuss the matter with the player and he can be read the riot act. Perhaps then the suspicious behaviour may cease, before a photographer catches the player in the act, it ends up front page and the game is considered less attractive to worried mums and dads.

There doesnt have to be any admission of guilt or anything, just to put the thought in the players mind that his suspected conduct is being monitored and may be cause for de-registration.

The NRL can be discrete, doesnt have to mention the names of the informant (dobber) to the player, it doesnt have to contact the police (although it might if the alleged crime was serious enough).

Perhaps thats a way of preserving the reputation of the game.

It sounds a bit big-brotherish I suppose.

Souths and Penrith have banned Mad Monday. Souths want to pay non-drinkers more cash for their abstinance and have forshadowed a salary cap discounts for non-drinkers.

I agree with the last poster though. Citizens first, players next.

 

[Father Ted]

Its good to draw out the prospectives lessons and views in all this.

If he's guilty and his form is as poor as beleived (has anybody here seen his trafiic or criminal record?), the court punishment is bound to override anything the club may have in store for him. He cant play footy if he is locked up.

But should some kind of "secondary" boycott be placed on a player by the NRL itself? Why should Cronulla or the Roosters or a Melbourne be able to pick up a player who has been sacked for disciplinary reasons? Who benefits then?

There should be "prefect rule" It should state that if a club officer suspects that a player is committing a criminal offence or disobeying a court order, that officer must report that suspicion to the NRL. The judiciary could read the complaint on a quiet day.

Then they could discuss the matter with the player and he can be read the riot act. Perhaps then the suspicious behaviour may cease, before a photographer catches the player in the act, it ends up front page and the game is considered less attractive to worried mums and dads.

There doesnt have to be any admission of guilt or anything, just to put the thought in the players mind that his suspected conduct is being monitored and may be cause for de-registration.

The NRL can be discrete, doesnt have to mention the names of the informant (dobber) to the player, it doesnt have to contact the police (although it might if the alleged crime was serious enough).

Perhaps thats a way of preserving the reputation of the game.

It sounds a bit big-brotherish I suppose.

Souths and Penrith have banned Mad Monday. Souths want to pay non-drinkers more cash for their abstinance and have forshadowed a salary cap discounts for non-drinkers.

I agree with the last poster though. Citizens first, players next.

Even if there were a policy of no other NRL clubs being allowed to sign him there's still the pay rise option for players of Rugby Union .
Why cut off our nose to spite our face ?
Lets be the trend setting club we tell everyone we are and take the responibility of rehabilitating the man . I don't think Wes is a bad person so why put him in jail and risk alienating him from society ? No in my opinion the answer to Wes is education , because Wes is STUPID ! He doesn't seem to realise the danger his driving may ultimately pose and only making him self aware of his obligations to society will we really fix the problem .

 

[God-King Dean]

I wouldn't give a sh*te.


I'm all for the "no dickheads" policy that the swans and Kings claim has been a factor in their success, but it'd have to be across the board... first out the door would be Mark Gasnier if we're fair dinkium...

Difference being Gasnier made 1 mistake, & has done nothing wrong since. Naiqama continues to f*ck up... & for the same thing.

 

[God-King Dean]

If guilty, it’s his FOURTH wasted “final chance” & a slap in the face to the club that has stood by him.

That's the way I see it.

 

[2 True Blues]

I suppose he would have to be the unluckiest bloke walking around if he was done FOUR times and each of those times was a ( so to speak ) one off situation.

People generally get caught for these offences one in hundred times or so. So it woulld be likely to assume he has been doing this consistantly, and ONLY got caught several times in comparision to the times he has actually comitted the offence.

??????????

 

[Follow Me Up To Carlton]

Difference being Gasnier made 1 mistake, & has done nothing wrong since. Naiqama continues to f*ck up... & for the same thing.

I dont even reguard that as a mistake, nor do I think he should have been punished for it.

I'm speaking more generally. From everything I've heard of Gasnier he would likely not make a "no dickheads" cut.

He is also an associate of Willie Mason.

 

[God-King Dean]

Fair enough.

LOL, I'd like to see someone sacked for that though.

 

[Willow]

[SIZE=+1]Wes Naiqama charged by police[/SIZE]
Written by: Dragons Media
23/11/2006

MEDIA RELEASE - Wes Naiqama
November 23, 2006 - St George Illawarra Dragons

The St George Illawarra Dragons were today advised that Wes Naiqama has been charged by police for driving without a license last weekend.

The Club acknowledges the seriousness of the matter and this seriousness, makes it all the more important that the player is allowed the opportunity to pursue his rights and that the legal system is given time to run its proper course.

As a result, the Dragons will suspend their internal investigations and make no further comment until all legal proceedings are concluded.

UPDATE (LeagueUnlimited.com): Naiqama has been granted conditional bail and will appear at Waverley Local Court on December 12, 2006.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]WWW.JUBILEEAVENUE.COM.AU[/FONT]

 

[Dave Q]

[SIZE=+1]Wes Naiqama charged by police[/SIZE]
Written by: Dragons Media
23/11/2006

MEDIA RELEASE - Wes Naiqama
November 23, 2006 - St George Illawarra Dragons

The St George Illawarra Dragons were today advised that Wes Naiqama has been charged by police for driving without a license last weekend.

The Club acknowledges the seriousness of the matter and this seriousness, makes it all the more important that the player is allowed the opportunity to pursue his rights and that the legal system is given time to run its proper course.

As a result, the Dragons will suspend their internal investigations and make no further comment until all legal proceedings are concluded.

UPDATE (LeagueUnlimited.com): Naiqama has been granted conditional bail and will appear at Waverley Local Court on December 12, 2006.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]WWW.JUBILEEAVENUE.COM.AUhttp://www.JUBILEEAVENUE.COM.AU[/FONT]

Drive without a Licence, section 25 of the Act I referred to. Not the worst of charges available ( if its the one). Obviously Mr photographer has given a statement. Its a bit off when the press become the news, but Wes has to take some blame.

Yes, the club have shut down their enquiries, thank god for that. Theyre getting with the program.

I dont know whether Wes can be educated. People have probably tried that in many different ways. Whatever the lesson was, he wasnt listening (if he's guilty).

And you cant make some people listen, they cant or are otherwise incapable of ingesting the information.

Thats one of the purposes of gaol, to stop re-offenders re-offending and placing us and our kiddies at risk. The gaols are full of drink-drivers and serious traffic offenders. Some of them have killed maimed and injured people. Many are "non-listeners."

Wes is still innocent and may be a top bloke and everything but if everybody was allowed to break the law, anarchy and kaos would ensue.

Its a tragedy, but he must stay off the road, its dangerous enough with us law-abiding folks out there!

I think he may need a doctors report to explain why he doesnt, or cannot, listen.

 

[2 True Blues]

:lol: :lol: :crazy: LMFAO !!!!!!!

 

[dannyboy]

Wes is still innocent and may be a top bloke and everything but if everybody was allowed to break the law, anarchy and kaos would ensue.

Sure thing 86.

 

[Dave Q]

Sure thing 86.

Wes and Gallop should have a chat under the cone of silence!

 

[Wicks]

I'm speaking more generally. From everything I've heard of Gasnier he would likely not make a "no dickheads" cut.

That is a fair slur I havent heard anything like that from team mates coaches or the club Heard the opposite

Care to back it up