Scandal Joel Smith (Melbourne): Cocaine trafficking accusation

[Chief]

Trafficking Accusation:

Scandal - Joel Smith (Melbourne): Cocaine trafficking accusation

Trafficking Accusation: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/joel-smith-melbourne-cocaine-trafficking-accusation.1373812/post-82421629 MFC and AFL Statements: Melbourne Football Club Media Statement – Joel Smith The Melbourne Football Club has been advised by the AFL that further...

www.bigfooty.com

MFC and AFL Statements:

Melbourne Football Club Media Statement – Joel Smith

The Melbourne Football Club has been advised by the AFL that further Anti-Doping Rule Violations have been asserted against Joel Smith by Sport Integrity Australia.

The Melbourne Football Club is not authorised to make public comment while this is an ongoing matter that is being investigated by Sport Integrity Australia.

It should be noted since the article has been published on the Herald Sun website, Joel’s management has contacted the Club on his behalf to advise that the comments made by the source within the article are not reflective of Joel’s views and the source is not speaking on any authority from Joel.

Joel has made it very clear that he has no issues or concerns with anyone at the Melbourne Football Club.

As the Club has previously stated, we will wait for the investigation to be completed before we update our supporters further.

AFL STATEMENT – JOEL SMITH

The AFL confirms that further Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) have been asserted against Joel Smith of the Melbourne Football Club under the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code.

Sport Integrity Australia (SIA) has notified Smith that three ADRVs for “Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking” of Cocaine to third parties are asserted against him.

Under the Code, Trafficking in an anti-doping context is relevantly defined to be “Selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering or distributing a Prohibited Substance, by an Athlete … to any third party [but] shall not include actions involving Prohibited Substances which are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate such Prohibited Substances are not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to enhance sport performance” (Article 1 of the Code).

Further, SIA has notified Smith that an ADRV for Possession of a Prohibited Substance (Cocaine) on 9 September 2022 is asserted against him.

These ADRVs are in addition to that previously asserted against him (in connection with a sample provided by him after the match between Melbourne and Hawthorn on 20 August 2023 which tested positive to Cocaine and its metabolite, Benzoylecgonine).

Smith will continue to be provisionally suspended pending the finalisation of all of these matters, meaning he is not permitted to be part of Melbourne’s football program, including Melbourne’s pre-season training that is currently underway.

Under the Code, the new asserted ADRVs will be further investigated by SIA and these matters may ultimately be heard by an AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal in the coming months.

Due to the ongoing nature of the anti-doping process, the AFL and SIA are unable to make any further comment at this time.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Strange comment from Max, TBH. Since there's only 3 people (Player, Doctor and CEO (or, appointed DLO) that know about strikes - positive samples, under the AFL Illicit Drug Policy, he wouldn't (or, shouldn't have) been told anyway. You're sworn to secrecy with that information......

Maxy is obviously not in Smith's phone contact list.

And is he saying none of Oliver's issues were drug related? The bloke he was meant to be babysitting. Most people seem to think drugs were part of Clayton's issues, don't they? But Max didn't?

He's either really naive, being lied to, not in touch with his playing group...and/or just lying.

 

[yaco55]

View attachment 1909454

With a maximum jail time of 15 years for trafficable quantities, would obviously depend highly on the amount total between 3g and 250g. A huge difference there but pretty much any amount ends the possibility of an AFL return if there was one.

The WADA code's definition of drug trafficking is different to a state's or Country's definition of drug trafficking. Basically the WADA Code's applies a wide definition to und

It’s irrelevant if you think that the AFL should come under WADA/SIA. It does & therefore the rules apply. It’s so shocking after the Essendon PEDs scandal that people are still surprised about this. It was amazing how the narrative put out by the media & largerly accepted post the Smith positive test was, he will argue it wasn’t performance enhancing & get it down to 3 months. Similar belief occurred over Essendon, clearly we didn’t learn.

As for evidence, we don’t know, all we know is (reportedly & kind of confirmed from the AFL) that their are texts offering cocaine for teammates & the suggestion it was on or around the semi final against Brisbane. We also should have learnt from the Essendon scandal that this isn’t a case of beyond reasonable doubt & a positive test isn’t the only way that they can and will investigate (no Essendon player had one). If SIA issue a show cause, they don’t have to prove guilt, rather you have to proof innocence. So is SIA sees even a possibility, it’s very possible more show cause notices will go out & the AFL, can’t stop it once wheels start turning.

The difference is that SIA had hard evidence for Smith popping a positive test - And recreational drugs are only positive under the WADA code if they occur on match day - I doubt SIA can manufacture a backdated positive match day test.

 

[knife]

All of which until you are given a subpoena to give evidence in a court of law you have no need to answer too.

I put this up on the Melbourne board, this sort of situation was talked about in the lead-up to the legislation being implemented, and was seen by several legal groups and sporting unions as an erosion of athletes individual and human rights. There are substantive legal minds who think the High Court could strike out much of the SIA legislation if it were to be challenged.

I'm not sure if Smith volunteered his phone texts or other information, or if it was compelled via the forced answering of questions that Sport Integrity Australia have, but I'm sure the AFLPA will be looking at this closely, especially since they are going from a match day breach, to accusations of trafficking supposedly based on text messages.

ASADA set to be granted new powers in move feared to threaten athletes' rights

Australia's anti-doping body ASADA is set to receive injection of power and authority, but critics say the planned changes risk athletes' already eroded rights.

www.abc.net.au

The right to silence under threat in name of integrity

The cautionary tale of Ernesto Miranda shows why athletes and others should be concerned about new powers that have been been recommended for ASADA.

www.smh.com.au

When you don't have the right to remain silent

Draft federal legislation relating to sport's doping, currently meandering its way through the Senate, is mightily troubling for individual rights.

www.smh.com.au

 

[memoryofmchale]

Strange comment from Max TBH. Since there's only 3 people (Player, Doctor and CEO (or appointed DLO)) that know about strikes - positive samples) under the AFL Illicit Drug Policy, he wouldn't (or, shouldn't have) been told anyway.. You're sworn to secrecy with that information......

This isn't true. Players will talk about a strike with teammates (bound by a NDA not to reveal this) and their manager, particularly the latter. And at the very least, players would be talking about what they do in their spare time and drug usage, with 18-30 year old males, is bound to come up.

Wouldn't shock me if Maxy had been around them whilst they used at the races or a club.

 

[Brezsa]

The WADA code's definition of drug trafficking is different to a state's or Country's definition of drug trafficking. Basically the WADA Code's applies a wide definition to und


The difference is that SIA had hard evidence for Smith popping a positive test - And recreational drugs are only positive under the WADA code if they occur on match day - I doubt SIA can manufacture a backdated positive match day test.

You don’t need a positive test to serve a ban. They just need to show it’s more likely than not. If they then issue that finding against a player, the player has to prove their innocence. Unlike criminal case where there is a different burden of proof

As we saw with Essendon, there was no positive tests.

 

[LanceRomance]

I put this up on the Melbourne board, this sort of situation was talked about in the lead-up to the legislation being implemented, and was seen by several legal groups and sporting unions as an erosion of athletes individual and human rights. There are substantive legal minds who think the High Court could strike out much of the SIA legislation if it were to be challenged.

I'm not sure if Smith volunteered his phone texts or other information, or if it was compelled via the forced answering of questions that Sport Integrity Australia have, but I'm sure the AFLPA will be looking at this closely, especially since they are going from a match day breach, to accusations of trafficking supposedly based on text messages.

ASADA set to be granted new powers in move feared to threaten athletes' rights

Australia's anti-doping body ASADA is set to receive injection of power and authority, but critics say the planned changes risk athletes' already eroded rights.

www.abc.net.au

The right to silence under threat in name of integrity

The cautionary tale of Ernesto Miranda shows why athletes and others should be concerned about new powers that have been been recommended for ASADA.

www.smh.com.au

When you don't have the right to remain silent

Draft federal legislation relating to sport's doping, currently meandering its way through the Senate, is mightily troubling for individual rights.

www.smh.com.au

They can have Reverse onus of proof because, I am pretty sure, SIA don't press criminal charges.

 

[memoryofmchale]

The scariest part about all of this is we've seen it play out before at another team. For some of the players with that club, it ruined or impacted their life forever. Something needs to change across the board.

 

[sydney_gws]

The scariest part about all of this is we've seen it play out before at another team. For some of the players with that club, it ruined or impacted their life forever. Something needs to change across the board.

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

 

[Elixuh]

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

Yeah but in this hypothetical your boss is Simon Goodwin.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

Not only that, even the lowest wage is still high, and after the professional career, you guaranteed at a minimum to get a cushy corporate gig because of the coteries. Even the most average rookie who never plays a game walks into a good job if they ask

Noone will touch him if this turns out to be true

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

They're mates. Who do you think people do drugs with?

 

[sydney_gws]

Yeah but in this hypothetical your boss is Simon Goodwin.

Surely he stopped taking it in say 2021 or earlier, if he ever took them at all.
Hopefully if he did take it, it wasn't in front of the players?
If it is considered " cool" to do drugs on a night out, this mentality needs to be stamped out somehow. I don't really know how though.

 

[sydney_gws]

They're mates. Who do you think people do drugs with?

Maybe in the off season is different, but during the season is just a very very bad idea.
I don't understand as I have never done drugs.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Maybe in the off season is different, but during the season is just a very very bad idea.
I don't understand as I have never done drugs.

Some would keep it to the off season only.

But as we've seen, some clearly don't.

And some, just like everything else in society, have no interest at all.

 

[memoryofmchale]

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

They’re smart enough to know how to avoid being caught. Can sometimes be a “well they won’t ban us all” situation or “so and so is doing it”.

 

[matty p]

lol, half your lads were on the nose beers then. There is a reason Johnson was shipped off to Richmond

That was in 2003 lol.

 

[matty p]

The scariest part about all of this is we've seen it play out before at another team. For some of the players with that club, it ruined or impacted their life forever. Something needs to change across the board.

Good call. This is a far bigger issue than footy for a number of these Melbourne players (and coaches).

 

[3207]

I don't understand how you do drugs with fellow employees.
I would be worried of getting caught , or dobbed in by someone else and lose my job and not be able to get as good a job again.

Starts with a sly gag here or there. If someone mentions the word “bag” or “coke” in its usual form.

If someone laughs you kinda get an inkling.

Few more hints get dropped and before you know it you’re having a bump with them before an 8am sales meeting on a Monday morning.

Because, well, Monday AM sales meeting suck

 

[Farm Boy]

Yeah but in this hypothetical your boss is Simon Goodwin.

Even their former president tried to reign Goodwin in and blow the whistle. At this point, it’s on the AFL for not stepping in earlier.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[memoryofmchale]

Not only that, even the lowest wage is still high, and after the professional career, you guaranteed at a minimum to get a cushy corporate gig because of the coteries. Even the most average rookie who never plays a game walks into a good job if they ask

Noone will touch him if this turns out to be true

Any ex-AFL star is eligible to play country footy, get paid $1500+ a game above board, extras in a paper bag, get a car, get a scholarship for your kids to attend private school, whatever. It’s a boost to the CV.

You might avoid HECS, club would help you find an apprenticeship, whatever.

You’ve got money and want to fit in. Only natural you’d do drugs to go with the gambling (horses but also, you can use third parties to place bets which is outlawed but it still happens) and excessive drinking. By world standards, AFL players are lucky enough to have the deal they have.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Any ex-AFL star is eligible to play country footy, get paid $1500+ a game above board, extras in a paper bag, get a car, get a scholarship for your kids to attend private school, whatever. It’s a boost to the CV.

You might avoid HECS, club would help you find an apprenticeship, whatever.

You’ve got money and want to fit in. Only natural you’d do drugs to go with the gambling (horses but also, you can use third parties to place bets which is outlawed but it still happens) and excessive drinking. By world standards, AFL players are lucky enough to have the deal they have.

I know the situation in country footy. They won't touch players who have major issues hanging over their head.
It took them years to even approach fevola!

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Imagine if Joel Smith gave it to Bailey Smith

6

Bailey Smith

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

 

[memoryofmchale]

I know the situation in country footy. They won't touch players who have major issues hanging over their head.
It took them years to even approach fevola!

It depends what the issue is, how desperate the league is and where the league is located. Some country clubs need the attention, talent or have a similar culture so don’t care. Expand it to local and it’s still an easy gig showing up each week for your cash, 30 touches and hangover the next morning.

Another rehoming location for our fallen snorting stars are the state leagues. What darling angels play in them.

 

[Sinjin Smith]

Three grams of coke as a trafficable quantity is laughable.

Yeah that's just called Friday night pffft.

 

[Bob000]

I put this up on the Melbourne board, this sort of situation was talked about in the lead-up to the legislation being implemented, and was seen by several legal groups and sporting unions as an erosion of athletes individual and human rights. There are substantive legal minds who think the High Court could strike out much of the SIA legislation if it were to be challenged.

I'm not sure if Smith volunteered his phone texts or other information, or if it was compelled via the forced answering of questions that Sport Integrity Australia have, but I'm sure the AFLPA will be looking at this closely, especially since they are going from a match day breach, to accusations of trafficking supposedly based on text messages.

ASADA set to be granted new powers in move feared to threaten athletes' rights

Australia's anti-doping body ASADA is set to receive injection of power and authority, but critics say the planned changes risk athletes' already eroded rights.

www.abc.net.au

The right to silence under threat in name of integrity

The cautionary tale of Ernesto Miranda shows why athletes and others should be concerned about new powers that have been been recommended for ASADA.

www.smh.com.au

When you don't have the right to remain silent

Draft federal legislation relating to sport's doping, currently meandering its way through the Senate, is mightily troubling for individual rights.

www.smh.com.au

The players who received the texts could be looking at bans of 2 years to a lifetime.

It's not a criminal matter and they voluntarily agreed to abide by the code.


2.9 Complicity or Attempted Complicity by an Athlete or Other Person
Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity or Attempted complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation, Attempted anti-doping rule violation or violationof Article 10.14.1 by another Person.

[Comment to Article 2.9: Complicity or Attempted Complicity may include either physical or psychological assistance.]

10.3.4 For violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two
(2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.


This seems like a slam dunk for SIA. They have actual text messages. Hard evidence. The players could argue it was some kind of joke or banter, but then it would be on the balance of probabilites whether they were joking or actually talking about their drug use, buying drugs, using them, discussing how many grams, etc. I assume the texts are quite specific discussing the amounts they were buying/using/selling that's how they've got Smith on trafficking.

2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Other Person

For violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.

He's looking at 2 years for being doping in competition with a substance of abuse, 4 years for trafficking.

If an athlete fails an anti-doping test for a substance of abuse like cocaine, the suspension can be reducted to 1 to 3 months if out of competition, but I can't see anything to suggest that this discount applies to someone complicit in an anti-doping rule violation involving a substance of abuse. Seems like it applies to any anti-doping rule violation.