NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

[Wosh]

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread.
Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the report button, please and thank you.

If you feel upset or need to talk you can call either Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636 or Lifeline on 13 11 14 at any time.

- Crisis support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 13YARN (13 92 76) 13YARN - Call 13 92 76 | 24 /7

This is a serious topic, please treat it as such.

Videos, statements etc in the OP here:

NO TROLLS - Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread. Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Hawthorn Statement. - Link to ABC Sports article. - Leaked Report

 

[nobbyiscool]

No, it now is about them. Who is the spotlight on? They are entitled to defend themselves.

Are the “players’ truths”, the actual truth, or what they now believe?

They are entitled to defend themselves - when they need to.

But at the moment they aren't facing any charges, and we don't even know whether individual's actions are within the scope of the AFL's investigation. I strongly suspect the roles of the individuals will end up being peripheral, they'll mainly focus on history and club culture ala Collingwood's Do Better report, exactly because trying individuals within the broader scope of a footy club/board/staff/culture is so fraught with danger and difficulty.

What they're doing now is akin to a SLAPP suit - corporations use Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation to shut up protesters and activists (people should read about the "Gunns 20" suit if they're interested in learning about SLAPP suits). It's what Clarkson and Fagan have done - they've announced the retention of high priced, high profile lawyers to scare people into silence. And from what we hear it's working.

 

[jj15]

Firstly, I'd be speaking to the Coaches Association and seeking their advice.

Secondly, I'd be getting my CA rep to speak with the AFL and try and negotiate the scope of the investigation. (This is part of what good unions do - get involved and negotiate before s**t hits the fan, rather than waiting til after and banging the table.)

Thirdly - if the CA wasn't being effective, and if they weren't involving me in the investigations Terms of Reference, that's when I seek independent legal advice. But at this stage I'm not retaining a lawyer, and I'm definitely not telling everyone that I've done it. I'm waiting til it plays out before I make myself look like a self-interested prick to the detriment of a lot of players who worked for me and won me a premiership.

Yer I’m going to my lawyer straight away.

 

[jj15]

They are entitled to defend themselves - when they need to.

But at the moment they aren't facing any charges, and we don't even know whether individual's actions are within the scope of the AFL's investigation. I strongly suspect the roles of the individuals will end up being peripheral, they'll mainly focus on history and club culture ala Collingwood's Do Better report, exactly because trying individuals within the broader scope of a footy club/board/staff/culture is so fraught with danger and difficulty.

What they're doing now is akin to a SLAPP suit - corporations use Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation to shut up protesters and activists (people should read about the "Gunns 20" suit if they're interested in learning about SLAPP suits). It's what Clarkson and Fagan have done - they've announced the retention of high priced, high profile lawyers to scare people into silence. And from what we hear it's working.

Yer but they are facing defamation of character. If I felt a lie was told about me that was this public and harmful I’d be using every mechanism to go at the accuser.

 

[Jazny]

No one has attempted to relieve them of their jobs. The AFL hasn't even commenced its investigation.

Loudly organising expensive legal representation is an attempt to intimidate the investigators and those making the allegations. Its an attempt to overshadow and intimidate the investigation process before its even started.

They didn't need representation yet, and they certainly didn't need their expensive representatives to become known publicly at this stage.

All this does is attempt to call into the question the veracity of the investigation before its even begun. Its the other reason I wouldn't agree to be reinterviewed - Clarkson and Fagan are (successfully) frightening them into silence with the implied threat of legal action.

This is a weird take.

 

[Forward Press]

I don’t recall Clarko telling anyone that as I wasn’t there.

Based on your pattern of posting in this thread, you seem to enthusiastically accept any alternative explanations from the coaches, back those who think Clarko is a good bloke, and insist upon criminal standards of proof...but seem unwilling to give the same leeway to the victims.

Maybe the ABC and Russell Jackson ran the report because they know something more that you don't and it's not just hearsay or lies from disgruntled employees?

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

They are entitled to defend themselves - when they need to.

But at the moment they aren't facing any charges, and we don't even know whether individual's actions are within the scope of the AFL's investigation. I strongly suspect the roles of the individuals will end up being peripheral, they'll mainly focus on history and club culture ala Collingwood's Do Better report, exactly because trying individuals within the broader scope of a footy club/board/staff/culture is so fraught with danger and difficulty.

What they're doing now is akin to a SLAPP suit - corporations use Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation to shut up protesters and activists (people should read about the "Gunns 20" suit if they're interested in learning about SLAPP suits). It's what Clarkson and Fagan have done - they've announced the retention of high priced, high profile lawyers to scare people into silence. And from what we hear it's working.

So what did you think about the aggrieved players engaging Leon Zwier of Arnold Bloch Liebler?

Because that happened first.

Are Clarko and Fagan supposed to watch their accusers retain Melbourne's highest priced lawyer and work with the limited resources of the AFLCA?

 

[nobbyiscool]

Hang on, we still don’t know who the players were, yet we know Clarkson & Fagan are publicly outed, so why can’t they seek legal representation?

Do you seriously think they’re going to be open about their shortcomings? Come on, if they openly do this then they are admitting guilt. Should you do it from a moral standpoint as a decent human? Yeah, probably, if they are guilty, but they aren’t going to.

They simply have to defend themselves even if the allegations and evidence is grossly overwhelming. I’d also think the players accusing them of such things will be following through on certain legal actions.

I think you're falling into the same trap as a lot of people in the media and in this thread.

You can do a shitty thing, and it doesn't make you a shitty person overall.
You can say something racist, and I don't think it makes you a racist overall.

And you can even be introspective, admit your failings and commit to bettering yourself without admitting that you're a horrible campaigner who bullied and harassed people because of their race. People avoid "being cancelled" every day by doing this.

There's a hell of a lot of room between the Jackson report and Clarkson in particular's defence of himself for other possibilities.

 

[Evolved1]

Yer I’m going to my lawyer straight away.

Exactly. With career and reputation on the line, I'd be on the front foot straight away using all options available within my price range.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Hmmm. I am not sure. I think if this had come out I’d be personally very keen to get as much legal advice as possible. I am certainly not condoning this, but I can understand why they want to get on the front foot and defend themselves. It’s literally their entire careers on the line here. It’s public, nasty, and life changing.

As I've said, I'm not saying they aren't entitled to legal advice.

What I'm saying is that by loudly alerting the media that you have expensive lawyers, your lawyers are trying to silence people whether you realise it or not.

 

[mcnulty]

They are entitled to defend themselves - when they need to.

But at the moment they aren't facing any charges,

They have suffered massive damage to their reputations, possibly to their career prospects. They are well within their rights to have allegations against them tested in a court of law.

Though personally I don’t think it will come to that.

 

[Gralin]

so the plan was to shame the club into paying for help caused by rehashing past events in the review by publishing the article?

sounds about right.

look at you go
anything to attack the people that have spoken up, and you wonder why the report was done in a way to de identify the people telling their truths

The club initiated this process, they asked the former players to commit to telling their stories, and then they got the report and said nothing for two weeks.

They didn't reach out to the players to see how they were, they didn't offer any help, they read the report, went this shit is bad, lets ask the AFL what to do then waited.

The only reached out to the families impacted after the ABC article went public, only made any sort of statement after the ABC article went public

And your response to that is still to attack the people who've been treated badly by former senior members of the club

 

[jj15]

Based on your pattern of posting in this thread, you seem to enthusiastically accept any alternative explanations from the coaches, back those who think Clarko is a good bloke, and insist upon criminal standards of proof...but seem unwilling to give the same leeway to the victims.

Maybe the ABC and Russell Jackson ran the report because they know something more that you don't and it's not just hearsay or lies from disgruntled employees?

Yer and when they present that evidence I will view it. If it conclusively shows they did what they are accused of then goodbye to them.
i just want to see actual evidence that isn’t testimony, that’s all.

 

[FlyHigh18]

As I've said, I'm not saying they aren't entitled to legal advice.

What I'm saying is that by loudly alerting the media that you have expensive lawyers, your lawyers are trying to silence people whether you realise it or not.

by loudly alerting everyone you have expensive lawyers can also show how far you're willing to go to prove your innocence. that you're not going to be bent over. that argument works both ways mate

 

[nobbyiscool]

It certainly will be. No doubt about it.

The first step will be clearing the AFL investigation, which is not a formal judicial process, as you have mentioned.

The following step will be the lawsuit against the ABC, in which the 4 families will all be required to be cross examined. The judicial system doesn't care whether you don't want to talk about it again, when the public accusations are as serious as these. They will more than likely have to face Clarkson and Fagan in court and repeat, in detail, their testimony.

I think Fagan and Clarkson are both fairly reasonable guys, I'm not claiming the accusers are lying, but there's certainly enough of a misunderstanding of the real events that Fagan and Clarkson would both be willing to risk everything they own to clear their names. I'm getting the feeling it's moving towards that level of flat out denial of the allegations.

As that's the sort of financial commitment a defamation case of this scale will take to raise a case against the ABC. Potentially $5-$10m in legal fee's. Per case. (Ben Roberts-Smith has just clocked past $20m in legal fee's as a point of comparison) I can't see them doing this unless they unequivocally think they have been wronged in this report.

Another internet lawyer...

Everyone should ignore this post, there's not a word of it that's based in fact.

 

[nobbyiscool]

by loudly alerting everyone you have expensive lawyers can also show how far you're willing to go to prove your innocence. that you're not going to be bent over. that argument works both ways mate

Which goes back to my initial statement where they're making it about themselves and their apparent innocence, and not about the players who feel aggrieved.

I'd be horrified to think Indigenous players who'd busted their arses for 4 premierships felt this way about me. The first thing I'd be trying to do is resolve it and make them feel better, not rushing to infer to the public that they're liars and don't deserve to have their stories heard.

 

[checkraiseulite]

look at you go
anything to attack the people that have spoken up, and you wonder why the report was done in a way to de identify the people telling their truths

The club initiated this process, they asked the former players to commit to telling their stories, and then they got the report and said nothing for two weeks.

They didn't reach out to the players to see how they were, they didn't offer any help, they read the report, went this s**t is bad, lets ask the AFL what to do then waited.

The only reached out to the families impacted after the ABC article went public, only made any sort of statement after the ABC article went public

And your response to that is still to attack the people who've been treated badly by former senior members of the club

i am not attacking anyone - other than potentially the journalist and the people coming into this thread with 100% tunnel vision rather than an open mind.

your post does nothing to answer my question which was about the publication of the article and the effect it might have on someone who has stated they have attempted suicide due to reliving their truth and some objectively traumatic events in the hawthorn initiated review.

on any reasonable view the publication of the article and the subsequent stepping down of clarkson and fagan and ensuing media pile on will intensify the scrutiny on the victims.

that was my point.

 

[checkraiseulite]

by loudly alerting everyone you have expensive lawyers can also show how far you're willing to go to prove your innocence. that you're not going to be bent over. that argument works both ways mate

it certainly does:

Indigenous families hire top lawyer for Hawks racism case

Four Indigenous families at the centre of the Hawthorn racism scandal have hired troubleshooting lawyer Leon Zwier to represent them.

thewest.com.au

 

[nobbyiscool]

This is a weird take.

It's not if you understand anything about the law and/or public relations.

 

[Gralin]

i am not attacking anyone - other than potentially the journalist and the people coming into this thread with 100% tunnel vision rather than an open mind.

your post does nothing to answer my question which was about the publication of the article and the effect it might have on someone who has stated they have attempted suicide due to reliving their truth and some objectively traumatic events in the hawthorn initiated review.

on any reasonable view the publication of the article and the subsequent stepping down of clarkson and fagan and ensuing media pile on will intensify the scrutiny on the victims.

that was my point.

so its the fault of the ABC for publishing an article not the AFL and Hawks for doing nothing got it

clear as day you're not open minded you're looking for anything to blame on anyone but the club and former staff

 

[FlyHigh18]

Which goes back to my initial statement where they're making it about themselves and their apparent innocence, and not about the players who feel aggrieved.

I'd be horrified to think Indigenous players who'd busted their arses for 4 premierships felt this way about me. The first thing I'd be trying to do is resolve it and make them feel better, not rushing to infer to the public that they're liars and don't deserve to have their stories heard.

I get what you're saying and it works if the media and public are not involved.
But doesn't work when the public is your judge, jury and executioner, you need to be quick . Their action is the only logical one so reading into it is silly.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

Which goes back to my initial statement where they're making it about themselves and their apparent innocence, and not about the players who feel aggrieved.

I'd be horrified to think Indigenous players who'd busted their arses for 4 premierships felt this way about me. The first thing I'd be trying to do is resolve it and make them feel better, not rushing to infer to the public that they're liars and don't deserve to have their stories heard.

Correct me if I'm wrong but there has been no mention of Clarkson engaging a lawyer thus far?

 

[Forward Press]

Yer and when they present that evidence I will view it. If it conclusively shows they did what they are accused of then goodbye to them.
i just want to see actual evidence that isn’t testimony, that’s all.

The ABC article outlines written evidence such as emails, and documentation relating to face to face meetings and phone calls between players, partners and staff. Testimony is actual evidence, by the way - depending on how it's corroborated it can have little to no value, or of great value.

As members of the general public we aren't privy to the specific details of them but it's safe to conclude the ABC won't be running a report that names three specific people without having some sort of solid evidence behind those allegations because - as they are rightly entitled to do - the three named people may engage lawyers to help defend themselves and even commence legal action against the ABC.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

Which goes back to my initial statement where they're making it about themselves and their apparent innocence, and not about the players who feel aggrieved.

I'd be horrified to think Indigenous players who'd busted their arses for 4 premierships felt this way about me. The first thing I'd be trying to do is resolve it and make them feel better, not rushing to infer to the public that they're liars and don't deserve to have their stories heard.

I think you are displaying a degree of naivety.

Clarkson and Fagan are not aware of who is making the allegations, this would particularly be the case of what is alleged didn’t happen or if the allegations are the result of misinterpretation of poor communication (note I am not passing judgement on the veracity of the allegations - I’m just posing a possibility).

So if Clarkson and Fagan don’t know who the alleged victims are how are they supposed to take steps to resolve it? Are they supposed to attempted to find out who they are? Don’t you think that would lead to them being accused of trying to “hunt down their accusers?”

Regards

S. Pete

 

[nobbyiscool]

Yer I’m going to my lawyer straight away.

Exactly. With career and reputation on the line, I'd be on the front foot straight away using all options available within my price range.

They have suffered massive damage to their reputations, possibly to their career prospects. They are well within their rights to have allegations against them tested in a court of law.

Though personally I don’t think it will come to that.

Which I think goes to politics exclusive of race or anything that's going on in the AFL. These are all perfectly reasonable views to have, much as I disagree with them.

As I said, what Fagan and Clarkson are doing is akin to a SLAPP - silencing protesters. And there are plenty of people of the conservative mindset who don't disagree with silencing protesters who are impacting money, jobs, reputations etc.

At the other end of the spectrum are people who are horrified by the notion of silencing protesters and believe everyone is entitled to their voice.

It's what's going on here - some people, on a political level, believe people's reputations and ability to earn a living are most critical, others believe entitling people to what they perceive to be justice to be most critical. It's not to say I as a progressive don't believe someone's reputation is important, I just don't believe it's as important as someone's sense of justice. Nor am I saying any of you don't believe in justice, it's just not as important to you as someone's reputation and their ability to make money.

And there's no point arguing the point when our views are based on values much more important than sport, cos people aren't going to change their mind, and depending on the election anywhere from 30-50% of the population agrees with you, and that many again agree with me.

 

[Engimal v3]

Which goes back to my initial statement where they're making it about themselves and their apparent innocence, and not about the players who feel aggrieved.

I'd be horrified to think Indigenous players who'd busted their arses for 4 premierships felt this way about me. The first thing I'd be trying to do is resolve it and make them feel better, not rushing to infer to the public that they're liars and don't deserve to have their stories heard.

This is nonsense, quite frankly. It's a nice, feel-good thought that it would play out that way, but it's totally disconnected from the reality that Clarkson/Fagan are in.