Essendon launches legal action against Carlton CEO Greg Swann

Remove this Banner Ad

pjhad1 said:
Even if EFC players and staff do not get infraction notices, they would be stupid to sue. If I was them I wouldn't like Greg swann discovering and/or subpoenaing all documents they have relevant to the allegation of cheating. Especially when there is so much information out there that people would love to get their hands on (like all the documents ASADA has access to) - they may even be able to 3rd party subpoena ASADA. To top it off this would all get played out in open court... Wtf are they thinking?!
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is too sure about that one... and it is the recurring theme. I can understand the spectrum of attitudes we see from Essendon supporters, because they should be entitled to support the club... but damn, surely the club and its representatives had some obligation to get a clue at some point in the last 18 months: they have been so wrong, so often, it is unbelievable.

In my view, it has been through ignorance more often than through deceit, but life would have been so much easier for Essendon had they raised both hands in February and said "OK, we think something bad probably happened while Dank was here... but as it stands, we really have no idea." Yes, it would have been highly embarrassing, but would it really have been worse than their attempts to stage-manage the situation over the last 7 months?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Blues_1864 said:
I don't think anyone is too sure about that one... and it is the recurring theme. I can understand the spectrum of attitudes we see from Essendon supporters, because they should be entitled to support the club... but damn, surely the club and its representatives had some obligation to get a clue at some point in the last 18 months: they have been so wrong, so often, it is unbelievable.

In my view, it has been through ignorance more often than through deceit, but life would have been so much easier for Essendon had they raised both hands in February and said "OK, we think something bad probably happened while Dank was here... but as it stands, we really have no idea." Yes, it would have been highly embarrassing, but would it really have been worse than their attempts to stage-manage the situation over the last 7 months?
Click to expand...
Simple answer is, Bully Boy Syndrome.

Essendon treats it's players like shit, it's supporters like gullible fools, the football world with contempt.

This is possible because the players are malleable, there is obviously enough koolaid drinking supporters about, and the King of our football code is an Essendon supporter who has bent over backwards and gone beyond the call of duty (according to a Hirdy leak at least lol) to protect Essendon.

I doubt they will go through with it, But I'm sure if they did they would get smacked about publicly so bad it would be historic.
 
Bluesince62 said:
According to Barratt last night, Swann is ignoring them. I suggest he knows more than us about what is about to happen.
Click to expand...
to be fair essendons legal rep=BSE is still getting the right paperwork together
he stated it would be ready in december 2026
 
Bluesince62 said:
According to Barratt last night, Swann is ignoring them. I suggest he knows more than us about what is about to happen.
Click to expand...


Remember when you were really young in school, and had trouble talking to girls, so you would throw things at them, or pull their hair?

The Bombers still need new Football Operations people and only have an acting CEO. I suspect the Bombers think they are flirting with Swann. Maybe buy him a coffee instead of threatening to sue him? :p
 
Monkey King said:
Would love to see this. Carlton get a letter from WADA showing the prohibited substances and couple this with consent forms, Jobe's admission and testimony from club officials who interviewed the pharmacist. Then point to the Oxford dictionary definition of acting unfairly to gain advantage and put the onus on the Dons court to prove beyond doubt they didn't cheat i.e. didn't act unfairly to gain advantage. The Dons wouldn't have a hope in hell.

Then. Swanny can bring a counter suit against the Dons for costs and damages.
Click to expand...

Not that this will ever go anywhere, but....

Defamation is not like a criminal case - it's litigation and works on balance of evidence. Both sides start on zero, and add evidence. The side with the more compelling evidence wins the day. It's literally the case that if the court finds that one side's evidence weighs up to 51% and the other to 49%, then 51% wins.

Swann has nothing to worry about.
 
I really hope the little garden gnome is stupid enough to take legal action.
However, I suspect, like everything else coming out of Essendon these days, Little's threats are just bluff and lies.
He's used to bullying ordinary, little people with litigation. Now that it comes to picking on someone his own size, he'll bluff for a little while then turn and run like the gutless coward he is.
All he has done since taking over at Essendon is make things worse for them with his hollow huff and bluff.
He has made a laughing stock of himself.
 
DrEvil said:
Unfortunate for EFC and strategy, truth is a valid defense against defamation.
Click to expand...


To a point.

You can't exactly walk down the road and tell an fat and ugly individual that they're fat and ugly.
It may be the truth but it's still defamatory.

Essendon are likely to let this slide. They've got bigger issues at hand.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HARKER said:
To a point.

You can't exactly walk down the road and tell an fat and ugly individual that they're fat and ugly.
It may be the truth but it's still defamatory.

Essendon are likely to let this slide. They've got bigger issues at hand.
Click to expand...
If it's true, then it's not defamatory. There may be other laws surrounding abuse, intimidation etc, that come into play, but a fat and ugly person could not sue me for defamation if I called them fat and ugly. Truth is always a defence against defamation and slander.
 
JackOutback said:
If it's true, then it's not defamatory. There may be other laws surrounding abuse, intimidation etc, that come into play, but a fat and ugly person could not sue me for defamation if I called them fat and ugly. Truth is always a defence against defamation and slander.
Click to expand...


Just making the point that just because something may be true doesn't automatically give you the "moral" right to announce it.
Guess I'm just sick of people that claim to "tell it like it is" when for what they're saying is actually quite unnecessary and often has a covert agenda.

Swann may have been right calling Essendon cheats but I'd expect that from a petulant child and not the CEO of an organisation. I can't help not liking that style.
 
JackOutback said:
If it's true, then it's not defamatory. There may be other laws surrounding abuse, intimidation etc, that come into play, but a fat and ugly person could not sue me for defamation if I called them fat and ugly. Truth is always a defence against defamation and slander.
Click to expand...

Not always the case because the other test is that the comments/opinion, whether written or spoken, may have to also be in the public interest.
 
HARKER said:
Just making the point that just because something may be true doesn't automatically give you the "moral" right to announce it.
Click to expand...
That I agree with.

Though I have less of a problem with it in this case, as opposed to other instances. I don't think he went very far and I think officials are tiptoeing around the fact that Essendon absolutely did cheat and should be called out for it.
 
HalloweenJack said:
Not always the case because the other test is that the comments/opinion, whether written or spoken, may have to also be in the public interest.
Click to expand...

Nope.

That was once the case in some states of Australia, until 2006 when uniform defamation laws were enacted.

Truth is now an absolute defence in all jurisdictions in Australia.

Proving truth in a defamation case can often be a tough ask. In this case, I think not.
 
Laphroaig said:
Nope.

That was once the case in some states of Australia, until 2006 when uniform defamation laws were enacted.

Truth is now an absolute defence in all jurisdictions in Australia.

Proving truth in a defamation case can often be a tough ask. In this case, I think not.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the update.
 
mxett said:
You probably should given ASADA haven't found evidence of cheating yet
Click to expand...


I think Essendon have made things look worse for themselves by threatening legal action over a throw away comment..They could have said no comment and moved on, instead now the media has been fed a reason to discuss the saga further, more bad press for Essendon (All press on this issue is bad press).

If Swann apologises it is an admission of guilt that he has defamed the EFC, why would he do that?

To cheat by meaning is to Violate Rules or agreements; the EFC surely have violated rules to be fined and have sanctions applied by the AFL...

Swann's response is the perfect example of some one not taking the rope and getting pulled into a circus, maybe some of the EFC heads need to think about this and start focussing their efforts on planning for the future of the club.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Essendon launches legal action against Carlton CEO Greg Swann

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
863
Satan
Satan
The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top