NO TROLLS Former Geelong player suing club over gang rape

[Slartibartfast]

There is no statue of limitations with sexual abuse. This matter should have been put to the police before it went to civil trial for some financial gain.
I'm not saying he isn't telling the truth, how would I know, but a matter as serious as this one has to be investigated by the police.

One thing that sits in my mind is that its pretty hard to find three likeminded dudes at one football club who all agree to rape a young boy.

The guilty bar is lower in civil cases which plays a part in why people choose this path.

 

[Cleric]

The guilty bar is lower in civil cases which plays a part in why people choose this path.

If he hasn't put a complaint to the police it will go against him in a civil trial. The courts will view it with suspicion and the opposition lawyers will put it to the court that the reason he didn't was because he knew it would be dismissed.

 

[western royboy]

If he hasn't put a complaint to the police it will go against him in a civil trial. The courts will view it with suspicion and the opposition lawyers will put it to the court that the reason he didn't was because he knew it would be dismissed.

You are incorrect - that is the best thing I can say

 

[Rod Stroker]

The guilty bar is lower in civil cases which plays a part in why people choose this path.

How can the bar be lower? You're either found guilty or not based upon the evidence. It's binary. You can't be a bit guilty, or half guilty. Like being pregnant.

 

[Slartibartfast]

If he hasn't put a complaint to the police it will go against him in a civil trial. The courts will view it with suspicion and the opposition lawyers will put it to the court that the reason he didn't was because he knew it would be dismissed.

No it doesn’t. sure the defence may question him over this but unless they can show he avoided a criminal case because the story may not be true it means nothing .

 

[Slartibartfast]

How can the bar be lower? You're either found guilty or not based upon the evidence. It's binary. You can't be a bit guilty, or half guilty. Like being pregnant.

Under both types of law, it’s the responsibility of the accusing party to present evidence to prove their case while the defendant defends themselves – that’s what we mean when we say “innocent until proven guilty”.
The difference between the two types of law is the standard of proof.

To win a civil case, the plaintiff needs to prove that on the balance of probabilities, their case is more probable than not.

The standard of proof in a criminal case however is much higher.

In criminal cases, the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime in question happened, and that the defendant perpetrated it.

In short, they have to leave no room for doubt and completely eliminate other possibilities in order to secure a conviction – this makes it much harder for a criminal solicitor to prove their case compared to a civil lawyer.

https://dowsleyassociates.com.au/big-differences-between-civil-and-criminal-law/

 

[dangerwood]

How can the bar be lower? You're either found guilty or not based upon the evidence. It's binary. You can't be a bit guilty, or half guilty. Like being pregnant.

As Slartibartfast has stated, the burden of proof is different and additionally the penalties are different.

Geelong won't be charged and sent to prison but a court may be convinced they didn't do enough and should compensate this person.

Still costs a lot of money to go down this path, so it's no benefit unless you've got some evidence supporting your version of events.

 

[Cleric]

No it doesn’t. sure the defence may question him over this but unless they can show he avoided a criminal case because the story may not be true it means nothing .

It will. The court will have an expectation that these serious matters are reported to the authorities and while the may not come out and say it, it will be in their minds.
It could, and will be said by the defence, that this is soley about money, and that his failure to report the alleged offence to the police was because if they dismissed it, then it would effect his chances at a civil trial.
It's a legal strategy, and the courts will know it

 

[Cleric]

Under both types of law, it’s the responsibility of the accusing party to present evidence to prove their case while the defendant defends themselves – that’s what we mean when we say “innocent until proven guilty”.
The difference between the two types of law is the standard of proof.

To win a civil case, the plaintiff needs to prove that on the balance of probabilities, their case is more probable than not.

The standard of proof in a criminal case however is much higher.

In criminal cases, the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime in question happened, and that the defendant perpetrated it.

In short, they have to leave no room for doubt and completely eliminate other possibilities in order to secure a conviction – this makes it much harder for a criminal solicitor to prove their case compared to a civil lawyer.

https://dowsleyassociates.com.au/big-differences-between-civil-and-criminal-law/

Sure, but they will still have to prove that the event happened.
If it is his word against three others then it won't be enough. There will need to be a trail of evidence showing that he told people about it when it happened, that he wrote about it in his diary, that there is witnesses who saw something abnormal at the time, and that he went to the club about it.
If he was being harassed by some.other players, and never went to inform the club or club staff about it, then how can they be held responsible? If there is a pot hole in the road and you go over it in your car and damage your suspension, if the council was unaware that the hole was there they are not responsible. If someone reported it to the council and they failed to fill the hole, then they are responsible.

 

[Slartibartfast]

It will. The court will have an expectation that these serious matters are reported to the authorities and while the may not come out and say it, it will be in their minds.
It could, and will be said by the defence, that this is soley about money, and that his failure to report the alleged offence to the police was because if they dismissed it, then it would effect his chances at a civil trial.
It's a legal strategy, and the courts will know it

That is utter fantasy.
there is no obligation to lay criminal charges and it does not effect any civil claim.
They are totally separate.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Sure, but they will still have to prove that the event happened.
If it is his word against three others then it won't be enough. There will need to be a trail of evidence showing that he told people about it when it happened, that he wrote about it in his diary, that there is witnesses who saw something abnormal at the time, and that he went to the club about it.
If he was being harassed by some.other players, and never went to inform the club or club staff about it, then how can they be held responsible? If there is a pot hole in the road and you go over it in your car and damage your suspension, if the council was unaware that the hole was there they are not responsible. If someone reported it to the council and they failed to fill the hole, then they are responsible.

My comment was showing the difference between civil and criminal cases. In both cases they need to prove the guilt but to a different standard.

 

[Cleric]

That is utter fantasy.
there is no obligation to lay criminal charges and it does not effect any civil claim.
They are totally separate.

There's no law that says you have to report a crime before you take someone to civil court, however this will form.part of the defence case and will be uses to sow doubt of the action happening.

 

[Bostonian]

Wouldn't surprise me at all if a certain players name came up. Rumours back in the day he was involved in a cover up for another such awful incident.

 

[Slartibartfast]

There's no law that says you have to report a crime before you take someone to civil court, however this will form.part of the defence case and will be uses to sow doubt of the action happening.

Not it doesn’t , NEVER!!
A judge would not allow it. Not laying criminal charges bears no evidence of not being truthful, ever!!!

Show me where this precedent has been applied?????

 

[Cleric]

Not it doesn’t , NEVER!!
A judge would not allow it. Not laying criminal charges bears no evidence of not being truthful, ever!!!

Show me where this precedent has been applied?????

It actually is.
I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but court is an adveseral system.
For him to put forwad his case he will have to go into the witness stand. As such the defence will have the opportunity to cross examine him and one of the things they will is to try and bring his character and motivation into question.
If you think otherwise, you are fooling yourself .

Q. Why did you choose not to go to the police?
Q. Why did you choose not to lodge a complaint with the Geelong Football Club?
Q. I put it to you Mr X, that the reason you didn't do either of them is because it never happened.
Q. I put it to you that you are only bringing this up now as you wish to make money from the Geelong Football club and that's why you never reported this alleged assault to either the police or the Football club.

This is absolutely the line of questioning that will be put to him. This would be on the tame end of it. Lawyers can be brutal.

 

[Slartibartfast]

It will. The court will have an expectation that these serious matters are reported to the authorities and while the may not come out and say it, it will be in their minds.
It could, and will be said by the defence, that this is soley about money, and that his failure to report the alleged offence to the police was because if they dismissed it, then it would effect his chances at a civil trial.
It's a legal strategy, and the courts will know it

The court has NO expectation assaults are reported. The figure is only a 16% of sexual assaults are reported to police. The courts are full aware of this because they know victims of sexual assaults dont feel capable of going to the police. This is heightened when the victim is young.
The vast majority dont make it to trial so any victim who fronts a civil case is highly likely not to have layed police charges.
Also, Sometimes victim's make a police statement with no intent of laying charges.

EDIT is around 16% only go to the police as per https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/03...-d54c74fa601a/aihw-fdv-5.pdf.aspx?inline=true

There will need to be a trail of evidence showing that he told people about it when it happened, that he wrote about it in his diary, that there is witnesses who saw something abnormal at the time, and that he went to the club about it.

Any contemporaneous info can be used. Discussion with a partner , doctor, councillor, families, friend, diaries. These are not always available yet cases are still found guilty purely of the basis that the evidence of the victim outweighed that of the defenders.

As such the defence will have the opportunity to cross examine him

I see now you are changing your story from what a court expects to what a lawyer will do

A lawyer may ask did you report this to police but it carries zero weight. He will not be able to dwell on this either. The courts know that in most instances this does not happen hence it has NO influence of outcome.

 

[ferball]

The court has NO expectation assaults are reported. The figure is only a 16% of sexual assaults are reported to police. The courts are full aware of this because they know victims of sexual assaults dont feel capable of going to the police. This is heightened when the victim is young.
The vast majority dont make it to trial so any victim who fronts a civil case is highly likely not to have layed police charges.
Also, Sometimes victim's make a police statement with no intent of laying charges.

The likelihood of a young indigenous man reporting anything to the police in the early 1980s are extremely low. Let alone that they'd been sexually assaulted by Geelong footballers to what I assume would be coppers in Geelong.

 

[Slartibartfast]

The likelihood of a young indigenous man reporting anything to the police in the early 1980s are extremely low. Let alone that they'd been sexually assaulted by Geelong footballers to what I assume would be coppers in Geelong.

This is so right . Young , black and abused.

 

[kickazz]

How can the bar be lower? You're either found guilty or not based upon the evidence. It's binary. You can't be a bit guilty, or half guilty. Like being pregnant.

Criminal = Beyond reasonable doubt

Civil = Balance of Probabilities


Probs more complex than that but that's the gist of it.

 

[Cleric]

The court has NO expectation assaults are reported. The figure is only a 16% of sexual assaults are reported to police. The courts are full aware of this because they know victims of sexual assaults dont feel capable of going to the police. This is heightened when the victim is young.
The vast majority dont make it to trial so any victim who fronts a civil case is highly likely not to have layed police charges.
Also, Sometimes victim's make a police statement with no intent of laying charges.

EDIT is around 16% only go to the police as per https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/03...-d54c74fa601a/aihw-fdv-5.pdf.aspx?inline=true



Any contemporaneous info can be used. Discussion with a partner , doctor, councillor, families, friend, diaries. These are not always available yet cases are still found guilty purely of the basis that the evidence of the victim outweighed that of the defenders.






I see now you are changing your story from what a court expects to what a lawyer will do

A lawyer may ask did you report this to police but it carries zero weight. He will not be able to dwell on this either. The courts know that in most instances this does not happen hence it has NO influence of outcome.

I'm not changing my story at all. There is an expectation that it should have been reported to the Authorities when it happened. It didn't happen. This lack of reporting will absolutely go against him.
Two scenarios.
1. He reported it to the police and to the club.
2. He didn't do either.

If you don't understand that if he had of reported it to the police it would have made his case stronger then I don't know what to do for you.
By not reporting it he now has the issue of explaining why he didn't do it, and it allows the defence to make a case that he didn't report it because it didn't happen.
It is going to cause an issue for him, and it will be used by the defence to weaken his case. And if you don't think a Jury or judge isn't going to think about why he didn't report it then again, I don't know what to tell you.
We have people here questioning it, and a jury is made up of the general public.
If you think the judge also wouldn't think about it, then I doubt you haven't had to stand in front of many, because they all have their own biases, and they do effect how they rule.

On top of that, he will have to explain why he still hasn't reported it to the police. He has had the courage to make this matter public by a civil matter, yet can't do the same put a police complaint in?
Ask yourself why he hasn't done it now. Doesn't he want those guys to be prosecuted? What about taking these predators off the streets so they can't do it to anyone else?
There's no point putting up figures of people who don't report SA to the police when this matter is going to civil court for money, yet still hasn't been reported.

 

[Kwality]

My comment was showing the difference between civil and criminal cases. In both cases they need to prove the guilt but to a different standard.

What is the accused guilty of in a civil case ?

 

[Slartibartfast]

I'm not changing my story at all. There is an expectation that it should have been reported to the Authorities when it happened. It didn't happen. This lack of reporting will absolutely go against him.
Two scenarios.
1. He reported it to the police and to the club.
2. He didn't do either.

If you don't understand that if he had of reported it to the police it would have made his case stronger then I don't know what to do for you.
By not reporting it he now has the issue of explaining why he didn't do it, and it allows the defence to make a case that he didn't report it because it didn't happen.
It is going to cause an issue for him, and it will be used by the defence to weaken his case. And if you don't think a Jury or judge isn't going to think about why he didn't report it then again, I don't know what to tell you.
We have people here questioning it, and a jury is made up of the general public.
If you think the judge also wouldn't think about it, then I doubt you haven't had to stand in front of many, because they all have their own biases, and they do effect how they rule.

On top of that, he will have to explain why he still hasn't reported it to the police. He has had the courage to make this matter public by a civil matter, yet can't do the same put a police complaint in?
Ask yourself why he hasn't done it now. Doesn't he want those guys to be prosecuted? What about taking these predators off the streets so they can't do it to anyone else?
There's no point putting up figures of people who don't report SA to the police when this matter is going to civil court for money, yet still hasn't been reported.

If you don't understand that if he had of reported it to the police it would have made his case stronger

So its not the “court will have an expectation that these matters are reported to authorities.”
TO
”the lawyers will question”
NOW
”if he had reported it to police his case would be stronger”

your changing your argument as you go , at least you are softening from the courts will expect!

You keep ignoring anything put before you. 16% of sexual assaults are only reported. This is from the ABS. This is not new news but a long standing fact that the courts are aware Of this and fully understand how hard sexual assault is for victims to report.

My issue with you was with your comment that the “courts would expect a victim to have gone to authorities” which i can see you are now backtracking from.

No good NOW to try frame your argument that his case would be better if he had , that is not what you said. Instead of arguing in loops to justify your silly comment , just retract your initial comment as a wrong statement

 

[Slartibartfast]

What is the accused guilty of in a civil case ?

Yes, not the right Term.

 

[Kwality]

Yes, not the right Term.

Wasnt having a shot.
Some seem to believe a guilty verdict results.

 

[HTPunter]

There is no statue of limitations with sexual abuse. This matter should have been put to the police before it went to civil trial for some financial gain.
I'm not saying he isn't telling the truth, how would I know, but a matter as serious as this one has to be investigated by the police.

One thing that sits in my mind is that its pretty hard to find three likeminded dudes at one football club who all agree to rape a young boy.

1) it would stand 0 chance at trial unless 1 player admitted it

2) you don’t think footy clubs have cultures of “hazing” type activities that revolve around nudity & sex? I’m not saying they lined him up for anal penetration, but they still could have assaulted him .