Damage control: Yet another St.Kilda scandal Part 2

[Maddhew]

It cant be defamation, for starters that's Riewoldt, and he's admitted to it. End of story. There is nothing defamatory about an image, its either him or its not. She's not alleging any sexual relationship with him in fact she's on record as wanting revenge on the Club.

She feels wronged, and given the crap way it was handled 10 months ago it was always coming back around. I have represented my fair share of lets say 'interesting' people and one thing that is always the case, there is always some merit and you cna't just sweep shit under the carpet and hope no one notices.

The defamatory remark was that she took the photo. This implies that she was in the room with him when he was naked. If it was proven that she wasnt in the room, and stated it for the sole purpose of causing damage then isnt it the definition of defamation.

 

[aneale]

I thought Lawyers had to honestly inform clients of the likelyhood of success in a case. I wouldn't have thought a lawyer would go on TV and state something that wasn't likely. Oh wait, Doctors go on TV everyday and spruik bullshit treatments because they're paid. Why would ambulance chasers do any different? I stand corrected.

no they defend a position, likelihood of success is rarely on the subject. I know you killed someone, I'm not walking into court saying 'yeah we give up'.

Lawyers are paid to make a legal argument. So, I can say on TV, yeah it's theft because it was taken without my knowledge. They've taken an image (which still exists on the hard drive, not removed it) As an opposing lawyer, i say "where is the loss? your honour the applicant has suffered no loss, it can't be theft, furthermore the applicant has no copyright on the images. The witness has said on many occassions he expressly requested that the images be deleted, i put to you Mr Gilbert it is in fact you who stole these images of Mr Riewoldt when you wilfully kept the photos and then uploaded them to your laptops hard drive, you then carelessly left them available for a minor to access"

 

[aneale]

The defamatory remark was that she took the photo. This implies that she was in the room with him when he was naked. If it was proven that she wasnt in the room, and stated it for the sole purpose of causing damage then isnt it the definition of defamation.

thats not defamation, its simply a lie.

 

[Skids]

no they defend a position, likelihood of success is rarely on the subject. I know you killed someone, I'm not walking into court saying 'yeah we give up'.

Actually, I'm pretty confident that if a lawyer knows someone killed someone and they offer a defence of didn't do it, they'll be disbared if found out. They have to defend a person. But they're not allowed to knowingly mislead the court.

 

[SBI]

thats not defamation, its simply a lie.

Well a lie can obviously be defamatory. I guess the sting here is that he was being photographed naked by a sixteen year old girl in a hotel room which makes him a man of questionable moral character. Whether he can prove damage or not, who knows?

 

[Maddhew]

thats not defamation, its simply a lie.

ok, you prob know more than me, why isnt it defamation?

 

[Maddhew]

Well a lie can obviously be defamatory. I guess the sting here is that he was being photographed naked by a sixteen year old girl in a hotel room which makes him a man of questionable moral character. Whether he can prove damage or not, who knows?

would think considering the immense media attention that it may not be too hard to prove

 

[Thermo]

thats not defamation, its simply a lie.

Your simply wrong.

 

[NMFCMUFC]

Some blokes posted a nude pic of her on her twitter she has replied:

"Where did you find this......"

hahaha

 

[aneale]

Actually, I'm pretty confident that if a lawyer knows someone killed someone and they offer a defence of didn't do it, they'll be disbared if found out. They have to defend a person. But they're not allowed to knowingly mislead the court.

you don't ask them directly.

 

[Bombermania]

This case is not defamation because defamation requires the person spreading the slur to know that the slur is not true.

In this case we have pictures that have been confirmed to be of the said players (The two Nicks)

The issue is how did she come into position of the photos. Hacking is a crime, Stealing is a crime and there is even a off change that this may lead to the charge of Stalking

 

[smoovy]

doesn't matter where the photos were taken, it makes no difference if she took them or not. Everyone getting caught up pver this point is missing the point.

She has openly admitted its about getting the St Kilda football club and the AFL. The indisputable fact is she had some intimate relationship with someone at the Saints and then has been able to access this stuff.

Unless you geniuses are of the opinion she broke into the blokes house and he has never met her either. She can change her story all she likes and still post pics, she hasn't broke any laws and the Vic Police won't touch a 17yo over an issue this minor.

Unfortunately one of them literally did and is paying the price

 

[Maddhew]

How is it illegal? Was the photo stolen? Isn't this the same issue as with the players?

Twitter feed gone now.

may have something to do with her being under 18?

New laws on this are srtict, to the point where if a 17yr old girls texts her 17 yr old boyfriend a nude pic, he can be charged with having child pron

 

[Skids]

Account died what was it?

Just me being a hypocrite and one moment asking all to think of the person and the next posting a link to a twitter page that had a nude photo of the girl.

 

[Maddhew]

This case is not defomation because defomation requires the person spreading the slur to know that the slur is not true.

In this case we have pictures that have been confirmed to be of the said players (The two Nicks)

The issue is how did she come into position of the photos. Hacking is a crime, Stealing is a crime and there is even a off change that this may lead to the charge of Stalking

bu isnt the slur that she took the pic, meaning the players were in the room naked with the when the pic was taken.

 

[Skids]

It's not her.

I saw that picture and a couple of others of the same girl when the first St Kilda/pregnancy thing started.

So why did she ask the guy where it was found?

 

[aneale]

Your simply wrong.

yeah, nah. I've been involved in some defamation cases where clients have had two actions at once. It aint no slam dunk.

 

[yeah-nah]

Riewoldt showed poor judgement trusting Gilbert to bin the pic. Everyone knows his disposal skills are shocking.

 

[Skids]

Riewoldt showed poor judgement trusting Gilbert to bin the pic. Everyone knows his disposal skills are shocking.

Pay that.

 

[Bozo]

All that's left is for Gilbert to admit he was shagging a 16 year old . . .

Age of consent for that may be differ from 16yo depending on which state you are in ... oh, you mean with the girl.

I don't know what Riewoldt is complaining about, he looks more respectable and less of an idiot in the hotel photo than he does in the photo with Heath Shaw that was taken in October this year.

 

[boydsno1]

And how many other people at your school were in the same situation? At my school the average age at the end was 18

Umm i would there were 7 of us who all had our b'days in june alone and were 17 at schools end. From the top of my head.

 

[clobba]

Well a lie can obviously be defamatory. I guess the sting here is that he was being photographed naked by a sixteen year old girl in a hotel room which makes him a man of questionable moral character. Whether he can prove damage or not, who knows?

Either its BOOHOO 2009 still makes me cry or your heads so far up your arse you havent realised there was no girl present...which really makes the origin of the photo stupid, as at 41 I would probably happily let a nude photo of myself go viral for a shot at a 16 year old but not for stupid skylarking

 

[Bombermania]

bu isnt the slur that she took the pic, meaning the players were in the room naked with the when the pic was taken.

Putting the arguement that way then the players could for it isn't a good look.

 

[SBI]

Either its BOOHOO 2009 still makes me cry or your heads so far up your arse you havent realised there was no girl present...which really makes the origin of the photo stupid, as at 41 I would probably happily let a nude photo of myself go viral for a shot at a 16 year old but not for stupid skylarking

Have you always been this ****ed in the head or was it just a recent development?

Read it again, genius.

 

[clobba]

Riewoldt showed poor judgement trusting Gilbert to bin the pic. Everyone knows his disposal skills are shocking.

LOL gold