Not that Willie had anything to do with this.This is not about justice. Asada is part of the disgraceful WADA system, and with its reliance on ASADA, the AFL is complicit in a system that denies justice.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Not that Willie had anything to do with this.This is not about justice. Asada is part of the disgraceful WADA system, and with its reliance on ASADA, the AFL is complicit in a system that denies justice.
You cant leave a young man in the prime of his career waiting for justice like this.
Could you imagine if someone was hung out to dry like this and was eventually found innocent? What recourse exists for a player to sue the AFL?
Rioli being stupid doesn't excuse the inordinate amount of time it is taking for the case to reach it's conclusion.Or the supposedly young man of 24 years of age ( when does young no longer apply?) instead if being a tosser could have followed the rules and continued playing as he was and he wouldn’t have had to worry about it....
The bleating and the sympathy in this case is beyond staggering. He is going to cop at least the 2 years and more than likely the full 4... his careers done and he has no one to blame but himself.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Innocent of what exactly? He's already admitted guilt.Would love it if he's found innocent and we sue somehow.
Im am not making a judgement im talking about justice. Justice is not about innocence or guilt, its being swift and fair.Or the supposedly young man of 24 years of age ( when does young no longer apply?) instead if being a tosser could have followed the rules and continued playing as he was and he wouldn’t have had to worry about it....
The bleating and the sympathy in this case is beyond staggering. He is going to cop at least the 2 years and more than likely the full 4... his careers done and he has no one to blame but himself.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
As much as I agree that the delay and uncertainty in this saga is unfair, the criminal law in this state is not the best example to rely upon.Weird system. Pretty much a presumption of guilt by the entire system. Someone gets found not guilty after 24 mths of waiting (and being unable to play the whole time) and they just say what? Too bad so sad.
Least in criminal law matters they try to get things listed asap to make sure that any delay is kept to a minimum and charges aren't hanging over peoples heads. Pretty disgusting really.
It's not really about guilt vs innocence though - they already "know" he's guilty. People almost never "get off" these charges. Essentially what you're waiting for is the sentencing hearing, not a decision on whether he did it or not.
As for the criminal justice system, while you can usually get yourself out on bail, if it's a bad enough crime and there's enough evidence you can spend your time waiting for trial in jail no problems. The Claremont serial killer was in jail for three years before his case finally went to trial, if he'd been found innocent (unlikely, but possible), it would have been "oops, sorry for those three years bud, out you go".
As much as I agree that the delay and uncertainty in this saga is unfair, the criminal law in this state is not the best example to rely upon.
District and Supreme Court matters are currently taking around 2 years to get to trial for a person on bail and around 18 months for a person in custody. The cancellation of trials due to COVID precautions has blown these numbers out even further for some.
Meanwhile, The West seems to be suggesting that everyone charged with a serious offence ought to be refused bail, notwithstanding the fact that this would mean that even more people will spend 12-24 months in custody only to be acquitted at trial or to have their charges discontinued.
Unfairness and delay is par for the course.
I guess Willie should be grateful he was granted bail!The delays in lists are mainly related to chosen Barristers availability (some are booked out for a solid year in advance). Covid didn't help but the difference is the accused in all these cases are made aware of the date of the hearing within about a month (bar any technical issues arising). A judge also considers the strength of the evidence on deciding bail. In the current case, Willie still does not even know exactly when the hearing will be.
BIBLICAL STORMS R Upon Us.
Q - uinda is right behind Saudel.
BUCKLE UP.
Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!
Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threadsthreadreaderapp.com
WATCH THE WATER WILLIE Fans.
The new WADA punishments will be about Awareness training. After the Event and the Great Solar Event on December 21 2020.
Wake up Trendsetters.
Should the lights go out, please know we are in control.
I do wonder if part of the delay (now, not initially) is due to covid restrictions.The delays in lists are mainly related to chosen Barristers availability (some are booked out for a solid year in advance). Covid didn't help but the difference is the accused in all these cases are made aware of the date of the hearing within about a month (bar any technical issues arising). A judge also considers the strength of the evidence on deciding bail. In the current case, Willie still does not even know exactly when the hearing will be.
Comes off like a russian spambot or something.
No current season stats available
This is plainly untrue and reflects fundamental misunderstandings of criminal procedure. A person who is refused bail by the police is brought before the court that day or the following day. That is their first appearance. Whether they apply for bail during that appearance or not is up to them.Claremont serial killer trial had about 15 preliminary hearings, hence the delay. They argued about the exclusion of evidence etc.
Bail application hearing is always listed within a week (usually next day) and first appearance within a month. The point is they don't wait 16 months for sentencing if someone pleads guilty. That doesn't happen ever and nor should it. Usually 1 month max, maybe 2 if they need pre-sentencing reports. You know in advance when the hearing is and it is usually set down at one of the initial appearances (literally within the first month or so) so everyone knows the date the matter will be finalised.
Absolutely zero excuse for this sort of delay.
No current season stats available
Again this is patently false. I don’t know if you’re confusing the different courts but almost everything you have written is incorrect.The delays in lists are mainly related to chosen Barristers availability (some are booked out for a solid year in advance). Covid didn't help but the difference is the accused in all these cases are made aware of the date of the hearing within about a month (bar any technical issues arising). A judge also considers the strength of the evidence on deciding bail. In the current case, Willie still does not even know exactly when the hearing will be.
The players association surely have to get involved by railing against AFL involvement with ASADA. 16 months for a hearing and verdict is beyond ridiculous. ASADA taking the absolute piss.
Very little of this is relevant to Willie Rioli, but misinformation is misinformation and it ought to be corrected.PLAYERCARDSTART15Willie Rioli
- Age
- 29
- Ht
- 175cm
- Wt
- 78kg
- Pos.
- Fwd
CareerSeasonLast 5
- D
- 12.0
- 3star
- K
- 8.0
- 3star
- HB
- 4.1
- 3star
- M
- 3.3
- 3star
- T
- 2.8
- 4star
- G
- 1.2
- 4star
No current season stats available
- D
- 11.0
- 3star
- K
- 7.4
- 3star
- HB
- 3.6
- 3star
- M
- 3.0
- 3star
- T
- 1.8
- 4star
- G
- 0.6
- 3star
PLAYERCARDEND
This is plainly untrue and reflects fundamental misunderstandings of criminal procedure. A person who is refused bail by the police is brought before the court that day or the following day. That is their first appearance. Whether they apply for bail during that appearance or not is up to them.
A person who pleads guilty to a summary offence (assaults, drunk driving, theft as examples) can usually have their matter dealt with on the spot at their first appearance, or often in their absence. Sentencing hearings for matters of this kind usually last a few minutes and the accused are unrepresented more often than not, so are in no way comparable to Willie Rioli’s.PLAYERCARDSTART15Willie Rioli
- Age
- 29
- Ht
- 175cm
- Wt
- 78kg
- Pos.
- Fwd
CareerSeasonLast 5
- D
- 12.0
- 3star
- K
- 8.0
- 3star
- HB
- 4.1
- 3star
- M
- 3.3
- 3star
- T
- 2.8
- 4star
- G
- 1.2
- 4star
No current season stats available
- D
- 11.0
- 3star
- K
- 7.4
- 3star
- HB
- 3.6
- 3star
- M
- 3.0
- 3star
- T
- 1.8
- 4star
- G
- 0.6
- 3star
PLAYERCARDEND
A person who pleads guilty to an indictable offence will wait at least 4-5 months to be dealt with, even if they enter a plea of guilty at their first appearance (which would be incredibly unusual). There is an unavoidable procedural requirement for their matter to be adjourned for at least 8 weeks following their entry of a ‘fast track’ guilty plea. Only after that adjournment, the matter can (but is often not) in a position to be listed for trial, usually 2-4 months in the future.
So in the case of an indictable offence, you cannot know the date of your sentencing hearing within the first two months at least. It is more common for a matter to be on foot for 6 months before a sentencing hearing is ever listed so that the person can obtain legal advice and consider initial police disclosure.
Again this is patently false. I don’t know if you’re confusing the different courts but almost everything you have written is incorrect.
Speaking as a criminal lawyer who lists matters for trial on an almost weekly basis and who worked at the District Court, I can tell you that if you wanted to have a matter listed for trial in the District Court this coming Friday (the next trial listing hearing), you would be listing a trial in late-2021 irrespective of availability. There are more matters going through the court than they can handle in a timely fashion.
And it takes you 7 months to even get to a trial listing hearing at a procedural minimum (there are fixed minimum adjournments of 10 weeks, followed by 6 weeks, followed by 12 weeks, but ordinarily matters don’t get to trial listing until around 12 months due to delays on the part of the DPP), so an accused taking their matter to trial cannot possibly know when their “hearing” is within a month, or even 6 months.
To be fair that is their job
I've heard both Nisbett and Vozzo talk about it several times and not once has anyone mentioned requesting post-season. There answer was always, they simply didn't know when it would be coming up.so in summary,
- Willie did the crime in front of an ASADA staff member. Guilt not in doubt but mitigation is arguable. Club has said publicly on many occasions ' it is self inflicted'
- Eagles may have asked for the hearing post season - many seem to think this is so.
- COVID probably impacts as WA places an impost on entry thus a Melbourne hearing is required where there are other constraints. For example medical exams postponed in Vic to next year (accreditation not uni) - massive career impact and stressful. Businesses closed.
- Probable penalties 2-4 years depending on mitigation accepted.
- We dont know much more.