Ted38
Premiership Player
- Jan 10, 2006
- 4,202
- 462
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- The Jihadi Jets
As I posted yesterday, things aren't looking very favourable for Liam at the moment.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Liam Jurrah being held by police -Sen
- Thread starter Collingwood 4 eternity
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
As I posted yesterday, things aren't looking very favourable for Liam at the moment.
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
I'm not sure I'd agree - two of his charges have been dropped completely.
And probably two of the more serious ones considering both involved the use of a weapon (although obviously it depends on the nature of the aggravated assaults)
Compare that to Dane Swan who faced something like 13 charges back in 2003.
No - one was another charge of aggravated assault - dropped due to a no show by the alleged victim, the other was for 'carrying an offensive weapon at night' - a lesser charge and probably dropped due to lack of firm evidence of exactly what the weapon was.
Here's the Alice Court Hearings for the day. A pretty typical day.
http://www.nt.gov.au/justice/mctlist/today/crim/ras.html
- Jul 21, 2008
- 26,645
- 33,689
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I agree that Jurrah's career is important to the community, if for no other reason than it shows the locals one way out of their predicament. However, the outcome of his trial will determine the fate of his football career, though having said that, Andrew Krakouer comes to mind.
How could you possibly come to this conclusion.
I don't see how he can be found guilty - remember it is innocent until PROVEN guilty - when all witnesses have differing opinions and only have being drunk as a commonality.
Ted38
Premiership Player
- Jan 10, 2006
- 4,202
- 462
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- The Jihadi Jets
I'm not saying he's guilty just commenting that things aren't looking favourable for him. You may well say that you don't see how he can be found guilty and that's your prerogative but the facts are that he is going to trial on some serious charges and there is a very real possibility that he will be found guilty on some of them.
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
But what do you base that on?
Obviously going to trial isn't ideal - but a committal hearing only explores whether there is evidence worth being examined; not the validity or outcome of that evidence.
Ted38
Premiership Player
- Jan 10, 2006
- 4,202
- 462
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- The Jihadi Jets
We are not talking about a committal hearing, Jurrah and his co accused have been committed to stand trial before a judge and jury on a date yet to be fixed and it is possible that the jury will find them guilty.
If I was one of them I wouldn't exactly consider myself to be in a very favourable position. Would you?
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
It depends completely on the evidence presented.
In these cases I believe you can actually be committed to stand trial based on evidence which paints a co-accused in an unfavorable light.
Considering almost all evidence made public has painted Jurrah in a good light I wouldn't be feeling in an 'unfavorable' position if I was him.
I certainly wouldn't be jumping for joy at the idea of a jury though, no.
I'm not trying to say it's favorable, but it seems on a pretty even keel currently.
The blind naiviety of Melbourne supporters.
Have they thought about what is known?
Jurrah bought alcohol (a lot) and shared alcohol (a lot) while in the Alice. He shared it with some people who were not allowed to drink (we have a register in the territory - you cannot buy alcohol without photo id) due to past drunken misdemeanors. He then either led or joined (given his status the former is more likely) a drunken group of men into a town camp to confront others. They weren't there to have a friendly coffee and chat. No doubt you are all somewhat aware of the background behind the conflict by now.
Yes, there is a possibility a very good lawyer (which he has - no doubt courtesy of MFC) could raise enough doubt to cloud a jury's mind on the events of the night. The sad thing is of course, whether he gets off or not, the trouble is a long way from being settled. he is just one of many players in this sad affair, but a high profile player - even without his footballing fame.
But do you really think that Jurrah entered the little sister's camp that night with good intentions?
Have they thought about what is known?
Jurrah bought alcohol (a lot) and shared alcohol (a lot) while in the Alice. He shared it with some people who were not allowed to drink (we have a register in the territory - you cannot buy alcohol without photo id) due to past drunken misdemeanors. He then either led or joined (given his status the former is more likely) a drunken group of men into a town camp to confront others. They weren't there to have a friendly coffee and chat. No doubt you are all somewhat aware of the background behind the conflict by now.
Yes, there is a possibility a very good lawyer (which he has - no doubt courtesy of MFC) could raise enough doubt to cloud a jury's mind on the events of the night. The sad thing is of course, whether he gets off or not, the trouble is a long way from being settled. he is just one of many players in this sad affair, but a high profile player - even without his footballing fame.
But do you really think that Jurrah entered the little sister's camp that night with good intentions?
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
Firstly, I'm sure Jurrah could afford a good lawyer.
Secondly, is any of that known? Or is that all just hearsay evidence you've heard on the 'grape vine'... there's a reason hearsay evidence is thrown out in court.
We don't know about Jurrah's intentions, and you certainly don't know about his intentions.
IIRC at least one witness (and the only one who wasn't drinking) claimed Jurrah was defending himself from Basil's attacks and wasn't an aggressor at all.
Unlike Melbourne, Alice springs is small enough that most locals have contacts across the community. And yes, what I have said is not in doubt. I know enough people that saw him, black and white, buying grog. The town was aware of it well before this incident happened and most knew it would lead to problems. Everyone here knows about the ongoing feud and jurrah's standing in the community. Melbourne even fined him for drinking while here. Or have you conveniently forgotten this.
As for sober witnesses - there were two, not one. Frida Jurrah and Philomena White. You are simpy buying the QCs argument and choosing to believe whatever supports your hope that Jurrah was somehow an innocent in all of this.
Now I've answered your questions, how about you tell me what you think Jurrah was there for? Think for a minute.
What happened that night happens all too frequently here - but because a famous footballer was involved this time, suddenly it's national news. personally I think almost everyone there was involved in some way. Certainly all who invaded the camp, on both sides. Jurrah wasn't the only antagonist, just one of many. They should all be brought forth. But the reality in these events is that the police try to identify the main players in the hope that some form of justice is done. If you want to argue that's white justice, well that's another argument entirely. But you don't, you just want to try and argue his innocence based on his lawyer's arguments.
It's a sad state of affairs, and if any good comes of it it may be that more awareness of the issues here leads to further alcohol restrictions, not just here, but nationwide. But you continue to just take one position and believe all citizens are just as blind to the events of that night as you are.
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
I never said he wasn't drinking, I've never said he was innocent.
It's patently obvious there is conflicting evidence.
If Jurrah committed the crime, he should face the penalty - vice versa if not.
As far as I'm aware buying alcohol for people in the NT, is not an offense heard in the Supreme Court.
There's no doubt Jurrah acted irresponsibly, regardless of whether he committed the crimes he's being accused of or whether he was a facilitator to these crimes through provision of 'grog' or through incitement or whatever.
It's obvious that everything you've heard is hearsay - he may well have been buying 'grog', and obviously he was going up to the NT to sort out some problems... I'm fairly certain that was in the clubs press release when it was announced he would leave.
You may trust your 'contacts', I was told by a mate who's uncle has contacts in the NT Police Force that ALL the witnesses were giving unfavorable reports of Jurrah - now that's come out as complete rubbish hasn't it?
You hearing it from me (or a mate via an uncle) is hearsay. Me hearing it from direct witnesses isn't.
Buying alcohol for those on the register is illegal, but of course not heard in the supreme court - hence it isn't in this case.
And you still avoid the question. And you suggested that his drinking was just hearsay - now you change your argument. You state only one sober witness who stated jurrah was the victim. You stated the two dropped charges were the worst.You don't know what hearsay is. You have posted mistake after mistake. You do not know but happily invent.
Not that I care, you're someone who lives in a whole other world, with absolutely no idea about daily live up here. About the community up here. Which is fine, I have no idea about anything in Kew - but then I wouldn't suppose to argue my knowledge is equal with yours on matters in Kew.
But in relation to this case you seem to be purely focused on critiquing any opinion that paints Jurrah in a poorer light than you obviously hold him. A closed shop.and once this is all over you'll forget all about what is going on up here - like most of the country.
Buying alcohol for those on the register is illegal, but of course not heard in the supreme court - hence it isn't in this case.
And you still avoid the question. And you suggested that his drinking was just hearsay - now you change your argument. You state only one sober witness who stated jurrah was the victim. You stated the two dropped charges were the worst.You don't know what hearsay is. You have posted mistake after mistake. You do not know but happily invent.
Not that I care, you're someone who lives in a whole other world, with absolutely no idea about daily live up here. About the community up here. Which is fine, I have no idea about anything in Kew - but then I wouldn't suppose to argue my knowledge is equal with yours on matters in Kew.
But in relation to this case you seem to be purely focused on critiquing any opinion that paints Jurrah in a poorer light than you obviously hold him. A closed shop.and once this is all over you'll forget all about what is going on up here - like most of the country.
ThePuppetMaster
Yay
You misunderstand me, I've never pretended to be an expert - I think most of my posts have had something along the lines of 'IIRC' in them.
But if you want to take everything I say I'm uncertain about as gospel then be my guest.
I'll happily be corrected if I'm wrong - although not so happy with the manner of your corrections.
I suggested you stating Jurrah was buying drinks for a riotous mob was hearsay - I'm pretty confident it is, doesn't mean there mightn't be an element of truth to it; but hearsay almost always snowballs.
My opinion is that nothing has happened in the case to make me more concerned then I was prior to this hearing;.
Please stop colouring my comments. Jurrah bought alcohol for a group of people, some of whom were not allowed to be drinking. They became an angry drunk mob as a result of drinking. Drink has a way of doing that to people.
Anyway, for yourself and anyone else interested in the story, and more generally the situation up here - here's a better news source to follow than the filtered sources of the major papers. And certainly better than our main local rag.
http://www.alicespringsnews.com.au/
Anyway, for yourself and anyone else interested in the story, and more generally the situation up here - here's a better news source to follow than the filtered sources of the major papers. And certainly better than our main local rag.
http://www.alicespringsnews.com.au/
Ted38
Premiership Player
- Jan 10, 2006
- 4,202
- 462
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- The Jihadi Jets
I have to say that I was somewhat intrigued by that as well,after reading http://www.alicespringsnews.com.au/ it would seem that they are. Perhaps underthestars can enlighten us further?
hadn't given that a moments notice - I guess it's what you' grow up with. I think those terms are pretty apt.
witnesses are speaking warlpiri, or a mix of warlpiri and english and the court use interpreters whose own english is at best a second language. i guess it's as close to a literal translation as exists.
witnesses are speaking warlpiri, or a mix of warlpiri and english and the court use interpreters whose own english is at best a second language. i guess it's as close to a literal translation as exists.
But surely those conditions ( half shot and full drunk ) were only introduced after the colonisation period? It seems peculiar they have their own words for it.
I had dinner with Liam's uncle last night and my nephew was staying with him in Alice last week. They are not worried at all about the case. According to them he will not be convicted of anything.
Ted38
Premiership Player
- Jan 10, 2006
- 4,202
- 462
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- The Jihadi Jets
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-16/dees-deny-jurrah-walk-out/4204472
What's the betting that he wont return?
What's the betting that he wont return?
Brown Bottle
Seasoned Campaigner
Whatever it is I hope you lose your money. The game would be worse off for losing him.
Wasn't it during some "personal time off" that he got in all this trouble in the first place?
- Status
