Rumour Premiership Tiger star in trouble with the law - Nathan Broad named as The Photographer

[Jedi Tiger]

And if it was your daughter?

My daughters are aged 6 and 1. Irrelevant. Answer the question or ignore it, didn’t ask for your BS semantics.

 

[andrewb]

What I don’t get is many women are all about these
‘free the nipple’ type campaigns and equality between men and women’s bare chests/nipples - complaining that women’s nipples shouldn’t be censored if men’s aren’t etc. ... but if this was taken of one of the premiership players or their mates wearing the medal topless , no-one would say boo. Yet the same free the nipple type campaigners complain about this stuff. Double standards IMO. You either want free nipples or you don’t.

Bravo. A person has a right to choose whether they want to show their boobs to a friend, to a lover, or to the world.

I imagine you’d be quite ok with sending a picture of your shriveled member to your imaginary girlfriend, but you’d have quite a different opinion if she posted it to your Facebook.

#freethewilly

 

[Lsta062]

Yes Peggy, Richmond and Jack Reiwoldt have been shown up to be prize hypocrites, lacking in credibility. Full of sanctimony, outrage and fine words when Eddie made his stupid gaffe about one of their own, Caroline Wilson.

Very belated and muted reaction from Peggy, the club and none at all from Reiwoldt when this disgraceful episode and Chopstick Gate blew up. They've now just buried it in another Richmond internal club whitewash.

Paper Tigers when it counts.

Was that speculative or was the evidence well known? The Eddie case with Caroline Wilson and the chopstick gate + photo incident are not the same from an evidence perspective. They are not going to publicly accuse and slam one of their own players (or another player for that matter) of doing something wrong when they don't have sufficient evidence. Are they not going to leave room for the benefit of the doubt?

The reality is that people can make up details of an incident if there aren't enough people who witnessed it. That is why you cannot make an accurate judgement of something unless you know the full details of it.

We don't for sure 100% know if the player was involved in sharing the picture.

 

[Lsta062]

Yeah, having an inappropriate picture of her sent around Australia, that'll teach her.......

I feel sorry for any poor woman that has the misfortune of being in your presence.

Yes, that is a lesson. A lesson on how things can unfold in life. I am not saying that the picture should be circulated in order to teach her a lesson here, but it is a lesson for her and others about one of the consequences of uncovering yourself like that for a picture in front of a stranger (if that was the purpose of uncovering), even if they are a public figure (if it is indeed the player that initiated the circulation).

 

[Croweater23]

Bravo. A person has a right to choose whether they want to show their boobs to a friend, to a lover, or to the world.

I imagine you’d be quite ok with sending a picture of your shriveled member to your imaginary girlfriend, but you’d have quite a different opinion if she posted it to your Facebook.

#freethewilly

Bravo. You’ve managed to compare an apple with an orange.

Edit: banana.

 

[BBC1967]

And if it was your daughter?

Two former Collingwood players were found to have forwarded nude photos to female fans. No moral outrage from you Frank? I seem to think they finished up in a magazine. This whole area is a legal and moral minefield and no one least of all Pies supporters can take moral high ground.

 

[katmanblue]

And if it was your daughter?

He'd ask her to get the players autograph. Pretty sure.

On SM-N920I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Satan]

Player back early from Bali according to Caro

 

[Mad Bomber Sean]

So stupid person allows other stupid person to take a photo of her topless, then complains when other stupid person shares photo his mates?

Is this really a crime? Surely the league is just trying to appear to be big brother and care and said stupid player gets a disappointed Dad talk and this is all over and done.

What a beat up. Is there anything the AFL won't do in an off season to keep themselves relevant.

It's a crime mate pure and simple.

 

[Diamond Jim]

What is it about the rights of a person to protect their image under law that is not understood by some of the dullards on this page?

The issue of what the woman ‘should have expected’ doesnt come into it - just as saying a short skirt invites sexual assault is a primitive knuckledraggers rationale.

Criminal Law: There are offences of ‘distributing an intimate image without consent’ and ‘threatening to distribute an intimate image without consent’. The offences are located in sections 41DA and 41DB of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic).

 

[Punt rd end]

What is it about the rights of a person to protect their image under law that is not understood by some of the dullards on this page?

The issue of what the woman ‘should have expected’ doesnt come into it - just as saying a short skirt invites sexual assault is a primitive knuckledraggers rationale.

Criminal Law: There are offences of ‘distributing an intimate image without consent’ and ‘threatening to distribute an intimate image without consent’. The offences are located in sections 41DA and 41DB of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic).

There was a lawyer on 3aw yesterday, boobs aren't genitals there is a BIG difference in what is classified as a intimate image.

 

[hoianbulldog]

Player back early from Bali according to Caro

from the article.

He had previously chosen to remain abroad when the scandal became public

 

[Stax on the mill]

Was that speculative or was the evidence well known? The Eddie case with Caroline Wilson and the chopstick gate + photo incident are not the same from an evidence perspective. They are not going to publicly accuse and slam one of their own players (or another player for that matter) of doing something wrong when they don't have sufficient evidence. Are they not going to leave room for the benefit of the doubt?

The reality is that people can make up details of an incident if there aren't enough people who witnessed it. That is why you cannot make an accurate judgement of something unless you know the full details of it.

We don't for sure 100% know if the player was involved in sharing the picture.

Fair points, but my main beef is this has taken far too long, and smacks of Richmond just hoping it goes away if they drag it out long enough. It has been in the public domain for 3 weeks now. It’s not too bloody hard. He either shared the photos against the girls wishes, or he didn’t. If he did, he gets a kick up the arse and publicly named. If not, no further action and we all move on.

 

[Lsta062]

Fair points, but my main beef is this has taken far too long, and smacks of Richmond just hoping it goes away if they drag it out. It has been in the public domain for 3 weeks now. It’s not too bloody hard. He either shared the photos against the girls wishes, or he didn’t. If he did, he gets a kick up the arse and publicly named. If not, no further action and we all move on.

I read that they intend to come to a decision on Monday.

Richmond were probably waiting for the police investigation to conclude before handing out any sort of punishment rather than dragging it out until people forget. The police only announced that they'll close the case on Tuesday.

 

[TheEnsign]

There was a lawyer on 3aw yesterday, boobs aren't genitals there is a BIG difference in what is classified as a intimate image.

Pretty poor lawyer. Here's the 'Definitions' section of the Summary Offences Act that Diamond Jim posted above.

"S. 40 def. of intimate image inserted by No. 74/2014 s. 24.

"intimate image" means a moving or still image that depicts—

(a) a person engaged in sexual activity; or

(b) a person in a manner or context that is sexual; or

(c) the genital or anal region of a person or, in the case of a female, the breasts;"​

Jeez, no chance the lawyer was an RFC supporter just trying to muddy the waters a bit?

 

[Diamond Jim]

There was a lawyer on 3aw yesterday, boobs aren't genitals there is a BIG difference in what is classified as a intimate image.

Go ahead, , try and tell a magistrate tha5 a pic taken in the privacy of a bedroom is not an ‘intimate image’.

Never ceases to amaze me how desperate a fan gets when his or her team is implicated in wrong doing.

I really hope you’re not considering law as a profession.

 

[Russian Demon]

Go ahead, , try and tell a magistrate tha5 a pic taken in the privacy of a bedroom is not an ‘intimate image’.

Never ceases to amaze me how desperate a fan gets when his or her team is implicated in wrong doing.

I really hope you’re not considering law as a profession.

The law might be clear but its intepretation isnt. This would be a test case so would be pondered for longer to examine all of the forseeable consequences.

I dont blame her for dropping it, because the criminal case would have taken ages assuming they allowed it to be heard, and regardless of the outcome there would then be a civil case for compensation

If a brown paper bag was offered shed be insane not to take it. A moral victory takes a big toll on the first person to see it through.

 

[Diamond Jim]

The law might be clear but its intepretation isnt. This would be a test case so would be pondered for longer to examine all of the forseeable consequences.

I dont blame her for dropping it, because the criminal case would have taken ages assuming they allowed it to be heard, and regardless of the outcome there would then be a civil case for compensation

If a brown paper bag was offered shed be insane not to take it. A moral victory takes a big toll on the first person to see it through.

Sorry, can’t agree...the law is cut and dried in its reference to ‘breasts’

The grey area may apply in a ‘public display’, but I think you know that it was beyond reasonable doubt that this was a ‘private’ agreement that was made public.

No test here.

Assignations about ‘brown paper bags’ are libellous. Her reasons for dropping the case have already been provided - I wont insult you by repeating them.

 

[Russian Demon]

Sorry, can’t agree...the law is cut and dried in its reference to ‘breasts’

The grey are may apply in a ‘public display’, but I think you know that it was beyond reasonable doubt that this was a ‘private’ agreement that was made public.

No test here. Ner reasons for dropping the case have already been provided - I wont insult you by repeating them.

Im talking about the strength of the evidence as presented in court, not the wording based on the story as its going around in the media. The burden of proof is difficult to implement if it comes down to he said she said.

If you think this law wont be carefully applied then i cant help you.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Player back early from Bali according to Caro

Did they player return from aBroad?

 

[Satan]

Did they player return from aBroad?

A sex change?

 

[Punt rd end]

Go ahead, , try and tell a magistrate tha5 a pic taken in the privacy of a bedroom is not an ‘intimate image’.

Never ceases to amaze me how desperate a fan gets when his or her team is implicated in wrong doing.

I really hope you’re not considering law as a profession.

Don't shoot the messenger idiot I was quoting a lawyer

 

[Satan]

Don't shoot the messenger idiot I was quoting a lawyer

Dennis Denuto?

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

Two former Collingwood players were found to have forwarded nude photos to female fans. No moral outrage from you Frank? I seem to think they finished up in a magazine. This whole area is a legal and moral minefield and no one least of all Pies supporters can take moral high ground.

Why shouldn't Collingwood supporters take the moral high ground on this topic? The Pies players were the victims in that instance.

 

[go team]

My daughters are aged 6 and 1. Irrelevant. Answer the question or ignore it, didn’t ask for your BS semantics.

Ok. Imagine a photo you took of your daughter was circulated without your permission.