NO TROLLS Collingwood CEO Craig Kelly involved in racism & homophobia allegations lodged in court documents
- Thread starter Bunk Moreland
- Start date
- Tagged users None
A part from it being 2024, where everything is the court of social media, and even with a cleared name you can lose millions in endorsements because of a "vibe"
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #502
All that suggests to me is you may be a difficult litigant with unrealistic expectations. If someone makes an allegation against you that is untrue it doesn't mean you can successfully sue them and to suggest you would want to get every cent they have means you don't understand the system.
If this was to happen to you the court would have to 1st decide if you were wronged. It would then have to if you were wronged did this cause damage to you and if so how much was that damage worth. Unless it's a matter of.public interest or titillation it's not going to make the newspapers.
Once you understand this you will see why most cases are settled and why going to court usually doesn't give much satisfaction to either party. In civil cases courts will generally suggest the parties settle issues without dragging themselves through the courts.
- Nov 21, 2013
- 6,168
- 4,610
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Any person that makes allegations against me that are lies will have their name made public.
If people engage their brains before saying untruths everything will be fine.
But ask yourself would the public care?
- Nov 21, 2013
- 6,168
- 4,610
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
IF its a person they don't like they might.
Perhaps, but unfortunately I think the overriding public thought would be one of ambivalence or maybe at best a moments thought.
- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,346
- 7,472
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
So much this. People don't seem to realise this was an IR issue in the Federal Court. The courts want these matters settled through mediation. It's in everybody's best interests - the courts aren't tied up with piddling issues, and it's cheaper for the litigants.
The attitudes being shown in this thread are the reason why people spend $100k on legal fees fighting over $10k worth of assets in property settlements. Just because they need to be proved right.
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #508
Realistically if someone said something about you, assuming you are not high profile, there won't be any recording. It will be he said she said. These things are not settled in the grandiose ways you are imagining
- Nov 22, 2024
- 32
- 15
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #509
I don't think you'd make an accusation if you didn't have proof, you'd have to be stupid if you did. Kelly settling out of court proves he's a racist, so questions have to be asked of those who hired the racist whilst pretending to do better. It's not like the Collingwood fc don't know who Kelly is.
I think points deductions are in order also, that'll teach 'em.
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #510
Plenty of people make accusations without strong proof. You id here by calling Kelly a acist.
In civil as opposed to criminal matters if there is really strong proof there is less need to go to court or have a discreet settlement after a long period of time. In this case where there is clearly no strong case on either side it becomes he said they said. Employee sacked over other matters then makes claim against employer is seldom cut and dried.
Courts are rough instruments of justice, they usually fail the nuance test and most participants are left more bruised than satisfied by their involvements with them. I doubt Cleaver or Kelly feel any satisfaction. This is a murky case and I dont think any strong conclusions can be made. I dont think you can clearly say Kelly is racist but we cant clearly say he wasnt. Only real conclusion I would have is Collingwood doesnt believe there is strong proof otherwise Kelly would be gone
- Nov 22, 2024
- 32
- 15
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #511
Still, Cleaver has to prove his accusation and Kelly knows if he can prove it to be true, or if it's false, and that's the fact of the matter. Would you settle with someone that's falsely accusing you when you know he can't possibly have any proof?
I just can't see any reason why Kelly would settle to protect a false accuser?
It is interesting though that Kelly is not gone, which suggests to me that Collingwood believe that Cleaver is a false accuser? And if that were the case I would like Cleaver to be punished severely so other false accusers don't get any ideas.
But still, as it stands, this whole affair can only reflect badly on Kelly and Collingwood, which is a shame if Cleaver is a false accuser.
Innocent people accept plea deals and settle out of court in civil issues every day of the week.
- Nov 22, 2024
- 32
- 15
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Banned
- #513
If Kelly did that, then Cleaver is a false accuser. So where is the deterrent for the next false accuser if Cleaver goes unpunished, that would be my concern?
- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,346
- 7,472
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Omg, are you serious? It went something like this.
Collingwood: You are terminated for X, Y and Z.
Cleaver: Bullshit, you are sacking me because I raised concerns about Ned's behaviour. Unfair dismissal pay me $500k.
Collingwood: Rubbish, no way
Cleaver: See you in the Federal Court
Federal Court: Go away and talk about, see you in 2 months.
2 months later.
Federal Court: How did you go?
Collingwood/Cleaver: No progress
Federal Court: Do formal mediation.
Mediator: Cleaver, you are never getting $500k. Collingwood, you have to pay something.
Negotiations, settle on an undisclosed sum.
Happens every day of the week.
- Nov 21, 2013
- 6,168
- 4,610
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
They do, and depending on how serious the case is the false accuser has to pay a large amount and rightly so.
Sometimes it's out of the control of the person. I am sure Collingwood have indemnity insurance, and so the legal defence is being undertaken by an insurance company. The insurance company may make a decision that its cheaper to give the accuser 50k than to defend it in court, so the insurance company will make that offer and seek to settle, as it's better financially for them. They can't force Kelly to say or do anything, but this is the reason people sue companies and not individuals where possible.
For example, a guy I know runs a security company. One of his bouncers was attacked and he defended himself. It was all on CCTV. The guy who got hit by security sued his company. As he had insurance, they took over the legal defence and made a decision that it would be cheaper to give the guy a payout of a few thousand than to take it to trial. My friend was furious, but the insurance company has full discretion. So, the kicker is that since the guys company now had an insurance claim, they company put his premiums up 80,000 a year.
