Opinion Commentary & Media VII

[scottywiper]

The tendency of people on this board to defend, diminish or question the indefensible just because someone may have worn a jumper we associate closely with is embarrassing and puerile.

It's just human nature.

 

[king of the road]

It's just human nature.

To a point.

 

[Disco Dew]

It's just human nature.

I’m pretty sure this is human nature…


Ill see myself out

 

[krakouers]

What exactly do the victims want North to say/do?

It's got nothing to do with us. We didn't have anything to do with what he did.


Used to work with a guy who was busted with thousands of pics of kids on his computer... yeah, those kinds of pics.
In that case I wouldn't have expected his workplace to make a statement on it, it's not like they weren't enabling him or anything.

He was our coach at the time & some of
these events did supposedly happen in Melbourne

I get that too.
I have a strong positive attachment to the club and affinity with the players.
Sometimes that clouds your perspective for sure, particularly when you are young.
But to have that perspective over ride your logic when you’re older is the definition of puerile.
Not saying that’s you - just something in general we’re prone to.

That’s exactly it
This is exactly why I understand both “Nah, the Club had nothing to do with it” and the “formal apology” sides
I do think though, acknowledging it happened is a key part of it, admitting things could have been different (but you don’t have to admit fault at the club as we most likely have nfi on wether it was know at the club, suggest it wasn’t or was known in a very limited capacity)
It’s important to go, yes it happened, but we are a completely different club and we wouldn’t accept that now

 

[krakouers]

Whilst rumours have been there for a long time, it's sad to have this situation confirmed. Tragic,

it’s funny you say that,

Long story, talked to someone in WA Football industry years ago, Cable came up, was told there was something fishy about him.
Thought (at the time) it was about his choice of friends (expected as a high profile in a small pond he knew some people of dubious character)

 

[Kimbo]

it’s funny you say that,

Long story, talked to someone in WA Football industry years ago, Cable came up, was told there was something fishy about him.
Thought (at the time) it was about his choice of friends (expected as a high profile in a small pond he knew some people of dubious character)

I remember, many years ago now, someone attacked one of my posts (in which I was venerating his footballing genius) suggesting that he'd abused kids and wasn't deserving of honours.

 

[desie]

It will be interesting to see how the club deals with this.

Jim Krakouer is in our Team of the Century despite the fact that in 1985 while he was at our club he was convicted in a criminal court of 20 counts of sexual penetration of a girl under 16.

That’s notwithstanding his other criminal convictions which took place either side of his time with us.

 

[krakouers]

So the media attacks are against a man never convicted - just confuses me tbh. I suppose they have the protection of the evidence being delivered in court. I stress again I do not think it is all bull5hit - Cable takes on POS status to me. But the legal side is interesting.

In answer to your query, lo and behold what comes out:

Barry Cable: The legal advice that meant football icon was not charged​

Memo reveals failed bid to convict Barry Cable

A senior prosecutor told her boss more than 20 years ago she believed the woman accusing Barry Cable of sexual abuse — but in the same memo advised he shouldn’t be criminally charged.

thewest.com.au

Spoiler: Full Article

Tim Clarke​

The West Australian
Mon, 26 June 2023

A senior prosecutor told her boss more than 20 years ago she believed the woman accusing Barry Cable of sexual abuse — but in the same memo advised he shouldn’t be criminally charged.

For the first time, The West Australian can reveal the legal advice which led to the police investigation of Cable being dropped in the late 1990s, despite sex crime detectives pushing for the detailed allegations to be tested in court.

Memos from those senior detectives — also seen by The West — state firmly that “Mr Cable will be interviewed and charged with approximately 12 to 14 offences on Monday November 2, 1998”.

That interview actually happened on November 17, 1998 — but lasted only five minutes, following intervention from Cable’s long-time solicitor Michael McPhee.

After that, Det-Const. Christina Italiano said again “I believe there is sufficient evidence to charge Mr Cable with two counts of rape and three counts of indecent assault”.

More than two decades on, that former officer still believed and sat in court as the woman she had interviewed 25 years before told her story again this year, this time to the judge in her civil damages case.

Earlier this month, that judge also believed the woman — ruling Cable groomed and sexually abused her over years of her childhood.

That decision, which resulted in a damages award of more than $800,000, has now led to calls for the police investigation of the football icon to be reopened. And more questions as to why it was dropped in the first place.

The uncovered documents confirm the first formal complaint to police about Cable by the woman was made on May 7, 1998.

What followed was a serious investigation, involving interviews with the woman’s mother, siblings, friends, and with a number of psychologists and other health professionals.

At the culmination of that, Const. Italiano said her view was Cable should be arrested “because of the serious nature of the charges and some concerns Cable will try and contact the complainant and her family if he was summonsed”.

Almost a year later, a five-page briefing was passed up to then Director of Public Prosecutions Robert ****.

In it, the Crown prosecutor said in her opinion “everything about her account sounds credible to people who understand the types of emotional trauma experienced by young people with prolonged emotional sexual abuse”.

But she also then goes on to point out potential holes in any prosecution — highlighting the law as it stood in 1968, when the abuse is said to have started.

“There is a total lack of comprehension on his part that he was hurting her and would again seem to be typical of a personality type that believes she must really be enjoying it, but is coy,” the memo states.

“By the time we get to 1969 she is appearing to consent in the old-fashion sense.”

The girl would have been 14 at that time.

The woman later recalled an attempted rape by Cable at the changing room of the Perth Football Club in 1971.

In his judgment this month, Judge Mark Herron said the “evidence about this incident was convincing”.

But in the DPP summary for the 1990s, they conclude “when she is insistent about saying no, he becomes angry but does in fact desist he then indecently assaults her, but she does not appear to try and stop him with the same force.

“It is with some reluctance that I say that whilst I consider two of the incidents to be borderline, the overall view I have taken is that there would not be reasonable prospects of conviction in this matter without some acknowledgment from Mr Cable.

“I do not believe that would be forthcoming.”

 

[Mav]

I remember, many years ago now, someone attacked one of my posts (in which I was venerating his footballing genius) suggesting that he'd abused kids and wasn't deserving of honours.

Don’t know if I “attacked” you but it’s been well know in WA footy circles for 15 years.

Cable has done a lot worse

 

[Kimbo]

Don’t know if I “attacked” you but it’s been well know in WA footy circles for 15 years.

Didn’t think it was you, but if so, then no you didn’t attack me. You’ve done worse.

 

[Samsquanch]

Don’t know if I “attacked” you but it’s been well know in WA footy circles for 15 years.

Yep. There were stories going around years back about him. Like all stories, the sources were indistinct and of course, who wanted to believe.

 

[Tas]

Jeez, it's difficult to comprehend to Cable situation. For us oldies he was a champion player & rover and to watch any highlights from the glorious '70's will always feature his brilliance. Went close to jagging us a flag as coach in 1983 as well.

But without doubt it seems he had a dark and evil side. Undoubtedly our other champion players and aged club stalwarts would be disgusted. Think Greig, Shimmelbusch, Blight, Kekovich, Wade, Davis, Briedis, Burns, Henshaw who played alongside him or were coached by him.

I'm sure the club is looking at a statement esp.with Sonja & Jen in charge. Think it's a tad unfair as this occurred over 40 years ago and most people at the club now might have never met him, or if they have just over a quick conversation at a crowded function.

I'm sure a few of us have come across these types of people. We know how their other side is well hidden as they ingratiate themselves into peoples lives as coaches, teachers, priests ☹ They are sneaky bastard's to put it colloquially.

His life, family & legacy destroyed and be hard to ever show his face in public again.

I used to watch him play, it is pretty easy to comprehend the situation, the only thing that is confusing to me is why he wasn't prosecuted in a criminal proceeding given the number of people who have came forward with their abuse. Not enough evidence?

You don't get a free pass in life because you were a good footballer, even though it seems that way. We can remember and idolise the person as a footballer, but who you are as a person and what you do off-field matters. I admire Carey for the footballer he was, but he is a creep I wouldn't want anywhere near any female I know. Thomas is an amazing talent, would you want him dating your sister or daughter, etc?

How people behave matters. There is a reason Carey isn't back at the club despite repeated offers to "help out".

I think people are innocent until proven guilty, and a civil proceeding has a lower standard of proof than a criminal proceeding, but I am not sure if a jury heard that evidence from multiple women that the outcome would be different. Why would all these people come out and lie after all this time?

I don't think the club can say anything until the legal proceeding is over, I don't know if he is appealing or not, but if he doesn't and the outcome doesn't change the club has no option but to come out and distance it from him and strip him of any award or recognition. To do anything else would be to condone it.

 

[giantroo]

 

[marklovesbeer]

He said the AFL Executive wrote to Cable last week asking for any response he was prepared to provide. After considering his written response at a meeting on Tuesday, a decision was subsequently made by the Commission to immediately remove his Hall of Fame honours.

Wonder what his response was.

 

[giantroo]

The club will be making a statement soon regarding this.

 

[Disco Dew]

Wonder what his response was.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Gone from the NMFC HOF too.

Club Statement - Barry Cable

The Board of the North Melbourne Football Club has made the decision to remove Barry Cable from its Hall of Fame, effective immediately.

www.nmfc.com.au

 

[big_e]

He said the AFL Executive wrote to Cable last week asking for any response he was prepared to provide. After considering his written response at a meeting on Tuesday, a decision was subsequently made by the Commission to immediately remove his Hall of Fame honours.

Wonder what his response was.

At a guess:

Never charged, let alone convicted.
Deny the allegations.
HoF should be on football ability only.
Etc.

It's fair that the AFL asked him to respond, but also they've done the right thing by removing him.

 

[big_e]

View attachment 1723438

Club Statement - Barry Cable

The Board of the North Melbourne Football Club has made the decision to remove Barry Cable from its Hall of Fame, effective immediately.

www.nmfc.com.au

Gone from NMFC too

The shit that Sonja has had to handle in the last 12 months...

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Interesting.

As desie pointed out, Jimmy Krakouer has been found guilty in a criminal court of similar offences and is still in the TOTC.

Love to know the delineation between the two.

 

[Pres]

The s**t that Sonja has had to handle in the last 12 months...

That's what I have been thinking. You do hope she gets an easy run at some point.

 

[big_e]

Interesting.

As desie pointed out, Jimmy Krakouer has been found guilty in a criminal court of similar offences and is still in the TOTC.

Love to know the delineation between the two.

David Dench went to jail, too.

Wayne Carey has pled guilty to criminal charges at least twice if I'm not mistaken.

You could probably do the same with every club's Hall of Fame, though.

 

[desie]

Interesting.

As desie pointed out, Jimmy Krakouer has been found guilty in a criminal court of similar offences and is still in the TOTC.

Love to know the delineation between the two.

The immediate difference is that Jimmy received his accolades when his misdemeanours were already known.

It’s obviously subjective and a matter of degrees - for example are we taking into account the whole of a person’s character throughout their lifetime or only the period they were involved with the club?

Jim had a couple of serious convictions before he even got to North Melbourne.

I’m not suggesting the decision the club came to with Cable is wrong or that Jimmy should be stripped of his honours but it seems we’re drawing some pretty narrow distinctions in terms of nuance.

 

[see see]

Interesting.

As desie pointed out, Jimmy Krakouer has been found guilty in a criminal court of similar offences and is still in the TOTC.

Love to know the delineation between the two.

Interesting question, as the club's statement says nothing about the TOTC, of which Cable is a member.

 

[wgt]

im not a north supporter but personally i dont agree with this sort of stuff, We have laws in place to penalise people and whatever the law dictates should be the punishment. I think if you dig deep enough at anyclub you would find similar circumstances and there are a multitude of people today that even though they have been convicted of similar things still are not condemned, sometimes because of ignorance and sometime because of lack of care.