NO TROLLS Collingwood CEO Craig Kelly involved in racism & homophobia allegations lodged in court documents

[_Mike_]

Zero tolerance for ignoring the thread tag... zero tolerance

 

[Rich01]

It's a story that was widely reported, was pretty damaging and was investigated, so I don't even understand how anyone comes to "swept under the rug" rubbish.

Settling through financial payout is the definition of sweeping a problem under a rug. They have literally paid for the problem to go away.

 

[Kappa]

Settling through financial payout is the definition of sweeping a problem under a rug. They have literally paid for the problem to go away.

Wtf do you want them to do? They have an investigation, they went to mediation and settled the dispute.

WTF else is there? You don't even know if there was a problem, none of the claims have been proven unless I missed something?

 

[Rich01]

Wtf do you want them to do? They have an investigation, they went to mediation and settled the dispute.

WTF else is there? You don't even know if there was a problem, none of the claims have been proven unless I missed something?

Read the post I was responding to. Then my response.

Now if you want to get involved in that conversation, think about what you disagree with me in context to that.

 

[Obeanie1]

Your post entirely assumes Kelly was fully in the wrong and Cleaver's claims are 100% true.

That's not possible to be known, so I reckon you probably need to dial back the "swept under the rug" claims.

It's a story that was widely reported, was pretty damaging and was investigated, so I don't even understand how anyone comes to "swept under the rug" rubbish.

Out of court settlement.

Parties not to discuss details.

So details dont become public knowledge.

I.e details hidden from public scrutiny. Aka legally swept under carpet.

 

[TimothyJ23]

Out of court settlement.

Parties not to discuss details.

So details dont become public knowledge.

I.e details hidden from public scrutiny. Aka legally swept under carpet.

Mediation and out of court settlements are so commonplace it's not funny, and AFL has no jurisdiction so I'm not even sure of the point here.

I feel like we need to properly define what "swept under the rug/carpet" means generally too. To me, it's suppressing something ever becoming public knowledge. This incident was widely reported and for better or worse, most people have judged Collingwood/Kelly as the guilty party.

 

[Kappa]

Read the post I was responding to. Then my response.

Now if you want to get involved in that conversation, think about what you disagree with me in context to that.

What you said is wrong because coming to a resolution in mediation does not prove there was a problem, do you understand now?

 

[Rich01]

What you said is wrong because coming to a resolution in mediation does not prove there was a problem, do you understand now?

There was a problem.
$$$$ has made it go away.

Whether it happened as per the complaints claim is irrelevant. Collingwood paid for it to disappear.

 

[Dee Train]

Settling through financial payout is the definition of sweeping a problem under a rug. They have literally paid for the problem to go away.

Glad you’re not my lawyer

 

[Lockyer24]

There was a problem.
$$$$ has made it go away.

Whether it happened as per the complaints claim is irrelevant. Collingwood paid for it to disappear.

It’s what you have to do in todays victim mentality world, where the freaks have to be respected - you can’t win

Ironically it’s why this clown got a job in the first place, PC rubbish

 

[Gough]

It’s what you have to do in todays victim mentality world, where the freaks have to be respected - you can’t win

Ironically it’s why this clown got a job in the first place, PC rubbish

Read the op again and tell me who you think think the "freak" is in this story.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

There was a problem.
$$$$ has made it go away.

Whether it happened as per the complaints claim is irrelevant. Collingwood paid for it to disappear.

Kappa is correct. The courts want these matters settled by mediation; that's why you go to a bazillion directions hearings before you get to a final hearing. Was always going to happen, crazy thing is Collingwood probably could have settled it all before it became public and it would have cost the same or less once you take into account legal fees.

 

[burge13]

Cheaper to pay out rather than go to court. The allegations were absurd and the guy had a completely made up job looking for a pay out since he got sacked from memory

 

[Chief]

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/collingwood-ceo-in-bombshell-new-racism-scandal/news-story/8c4eb2e5fbd59d485b83e0de7fdc72f7

Collingwood is facing a fresh racism scandal, with chief executive Craig Kelly accused of joking about putting a “live f***ing possum” in a special room for Indigenous players and calling an Aboriginal elder a “dumb old bitch”.

In explosive court documents, Kelly is accused of a series of racial slurs and physical assaults by the club’s former head of First Nations strategy Mark Cleaver, a “Palawa person” who was engaged by the Magpies in the wake of the 2021 “Do Better” crisis.

In addition to the accusations of Indigenous slurs, Mr Cleaver claimed that Kelly also joked about sending a photograph of a ‘Free Palestine’ sign to a Jewish colleague to wind her up.

Earlier during that trip, Mr Cleaver – who documents detail is gay – alleges Mr Kelly told him “we are taking my car; it’s a real man’s car”. When Mr Cleaver joked that he thought Kelly “flew by helicopter”, he said the club chief called him a “dickhead” and “jabbed” him “forcefully in the shoulder” causing him “to fall backwards”.

Just as a reminder.

 

[Chief]

the guy had a completely made up job

Do you think this position was imposed on the club or something?

Do you think the club has ZERO track record on this stuff?

 

[Aussie in exile]

Out of court settlement.

Parties not to discuss details.

So details dont become public knowledge.

I.e details hidden from public scrutiny. Aka legally swept under carpet.

= something to hide that they don't want out in the public domain.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Cheaper to pay out rather than go to court. The allegations were absurd and the guy had a completely made up job looking for a pay out since he got sacked from memory

Cheaper to settle out of court rather than the allegations become public IF you have something to hide.
If you have nothing to hide and are innocent why would you settle out of court?

 

[Kappa]

Cheaper to settle out of court rather than the allegations become public IF you have something to hide.
If you have nothing to hide and are innocent why would you settle out of court?

This is genuinely a room temperature IQ question.

 

[South of the Yarra]

It’s what you have to do in todays victim mentality world, where the freaks have to be respected - you can’t win

Ironically it’s why this clown got a job in the first place, PC rubbish

Is alleged racism 'victim mentality'?

 

[Chief]

It’s what you have to do in todays victim mentality world, where the freaks have to be respected - you can’t win

Ironically it’s why this clown got a job in the first place, PC rubbish

Something very wrong with you.

 

[Aussie in exile]

This is genuinely a room temperature IQ question.

But it's not wrong to mention though is it.

 

[Hawk88]

Cheaper to settle out of court rather than the allegations become public IF you have something to hide.
If you have nothing to hide and are innocent why would you settle out of court?

Lets make this issue a little clearer, this matter would be covered via insurance if this allegation were made whilst he was acting on behalf of the club.

Lets say the legal counsel (of the insurer) thinks the legal defence costs will reach 150k if it goes through the courts but they believe they can settle the claim for 50k. Why wouldn't they do this? It does not matter to the insurer if they believe Craig is guilty or not, its sole purpose is to settle the loss for the lowest possible cost

Rightly or wrongly this is the real world we live in

 

[Kappa]

But it's not wrong to mention though is it.

It's a very very dumb question with a bunch of incredibly obvious answers.

The majority of allegations like this are settled out of court, regardless of whether they are true or not, if the alleged is famous and wealthy.

Court battles are extremely bad PR and for your financial bottom line, advertisers don't want to be involved with someone battling a racism case, even if you did nothing wrong, so it's by far the better option, and cheaper, to settle it privately.

 

[Aussie in exile]

It's a very very dumb question with a bunch of incredibly obvious answers.

The majority of allegations like this are settled out of court, regardless of whether they are true or not, if the alleged is famous and wealthy.

Court battles are extremely bad PR and for your financial bottom line, advertisers don't want to be involved with someone battling a racism case, even if you did nothing wrong, so it's by far the better option, and cheaper, to settle it privately.

In my book, IF you settle out of court there is something you are hiding from the general public that you don't want to come out

 

[Kappa]

In my book, IF you settle out of court there is something you are hiding from the general public that you don't want to come out

That's such a dumb take though, and you're completely ignoring basic common sense.

Court battles can sometimes take years and do a lot of damage to your brand/reputation, it's far better to settle privately and quickly, how do you not understand this? It's not about what's true or not, it's about what's best for you/your company

 

[Aussie in exile]

That's such a dumb take though, and you're completely ignoring basic common sense.

Court battles can sometimes take years and do a lot of damage to your brand/reputation, it's far better to settle privately and quickly, how do you not understand this? It's not about what's true or not, it's about what's best for you/your company

It's not though.
If somebody makes an allegation AGAINST ME which is a lie I will take them to court and sue them for every cent they have and that will make sure their names are in the newspapers.
There would be no out of court settlement where there name is not in the public domain.