Mega Thread Questions about the ASADA/ EFC/ players and the legal process/ defences/ liability

[Thrawn]

Did old ringsau get sacked or did he walk.

Got the burlap.

 

[tigerwill]

Yes they did, though only quite recently I believe. None-the-less theirs is simply not direct or specific evidence. If we're going to see an AFL footballer banned for any lengthy period of time then I think in fairness there needs to exist specific evidence that they did in fact take something illegal. I don't think generalised information will stand up in a court, and when alleging 34 cases of doping, I struggle how they are going to deal with each individual case.

What about the nurse at the injection site? ie anti ageing clinic. Would she know what she injected into the players? Would she have read the label and checked it off?
Maybe it said "vitamins"

 

[spackler]

Got the burlap.

Ah. I see. Makes a little more sense then.
Thanks

 

[I Rock]

Having followed today's happenings closely, I'm afraid that this statement is incorrect. ASADA lead the interviews, within the joint investigation, utlilising the AFL's coercive powers to obtain information from each of the players and staff. In each interview an AFL representative was present, though only asked questions towards the end of each interview. That is my understanding, and one of Essendon's, Hrd's and the players main arguments for the unlawfulness of the investigation.

That's nice, not what was in Hird's Court documents. Nice none the less.

 

[QuietB]

I doubt players were telling ASADA that they saw tubes of TB4 hanging around. The only evidence they would give is when where how often they were injected.

And who ordered it. Enter Hird

 

[QuietB]

Right or wrong, I believe that the player's own testimonies are a key piece of ASADA's evidence, and goes a long way to showing that this self-incrimination is what predominantly made ASADA's case unlawful. I don't think ASADA were capable of uncovering anything themselves. This has perhaps changed with their new CEO.

I disagree. All the players could possibly have told ASADA is that,

1. Yes we received injections.
2. No we do not know what they were.
3. Dank or someone else gave them to us on such a such a day at such and such a venue.
4. So and so instructed us to do it.

The players have thrown Hird under the bus in these interviews and that is what this is all about from Hird's perspective. The interviews will confirm that Hird was the leader of the program.

For ASADA to get anything to stick they also need;

1. Consent forms are key - nothing to do with interviews.
2. Details of the full supply chain which is the most important piece of evidence. The player interviews are very important at this point as ASADA need to coordinate dates of supply and administration of injections. This is also information that is available from other sources - club register if there is one, nurse testimony, other witnesses, etc. Other than that the interviews are pretty meaningless with regard to player evidence IMO.

Hird wants the interviews thrown out because they bury him, not to save the players.

 

[Sector 7G]

Did old ringsau get sacked or did he walk. This guy seems to be an ex-employee cheapshot merchant. He seems to take every opportunity to swipe ASADA.
Or is he just a big head wanting to provide the 'informed' contrary view.
I can appreciate ASADA didnt get things done as well as they might have but people need to understand that the scenario and thus the subsequent investigation was unprecedented and highly complex. They were learning as they went. Hindsight it a wonderful thing. Maybe ringsau would have done a better job maybe worse. Who knows. ASADA aren't the guys who rolled the dice on a marginally legal doping program. As long as we see justice served and no one got water boarded or evidence fabricated then I think most punters will be happy with the outcome.

He sounds a little bit bitter.

 

[tigerwill]

Right or wrong, I believe that the player's own testimonies are a key piece of ASADA's evidence, and goes a long way to showing that this self-incrimination is what predominantly made ASADA's case unlawful. .

This is what I don't get.
How can you self-incriminate when you've done nothing wrong, nor taken nothing prohibited or banned?

 

[Thrawn]

Why aren't the lawyers wearing wigs?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Yes Lance, because the coercive powers were used. Any questions put to a player by ASADA rep could have been answered with 'GTFO' by the player in question.

When the same question was asked by an AFL rep, it has to be answerd.

Bearing that in mind, who is conducting the interview, ASADA or the AFL?

Yes, good question, shall we revist?

What... is Robbo or Caro a legal authority for who is conducting interviews now?

No but let's ask someone who is



Chris Kaias @ChrisKaias · 4s
Andruska disagrees that ASADA embraced the AFLs proposals. "On what basis do you disagree?" She says ASADA not AFL led investigation

thoughts?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

I imagine Lances apology will be as forthcoming as Spikes

oh dear

 

[I Rock]

Yes, good question, shall we revist?



No but let's ask someone who is



Chris Kaias @ChrisKaias · 4s
Andruska disagrees that ASADA embraced the AFLs proposals. "On what basis do you disagree?" She says ASADA not AFL led investigation

thoughts?

Was the investigation only player interviews?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Was the investigation only player interviews?

kind of dumb question mate. Clearly not.

 

[I Rock]

kind of dumb question mate. Clearly not.

So by your own reasoning ASADA can lead an investigation that includes interviews conducted by the AFL......so what's your point?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

So by your own reasoning ASADA can lead an investigation that includes interviews conducted by the AFL......so what's your point?

haha incredible.

On what basis now can you claim the AFL lead the interviews?

I've provided a quote from the then-CEO that they lead the investigation, which includes the interviews. You show me something that says the AFL lead the interviews. Anything will do.

 

[I Rock]

haha incredible.

On what basis now can you claim the AFL lead the interviews?

I've provided a quote from the then-CEO that they lead the investigation, which includes the interviews. You show me something that says the AFL lead the interviews. Anything will do.

It's amazing your transformation into BSE over the past few months Lance. Hird's own Court documents claim the interviews were AFL conducted. You have been shown and told this yet continue (like most things that contradict your preferred way of thinking) to ignore it.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

It's amazing your transformation into BSE over the past few months Lance. Hird's own Court documents claim the interviews were AFL conducted. You have been shown and told this yet continue (like most things that contradict your preferred way of thinking) to ignore it.

oh really? I've been shown this have I? You mean this?

2.4. ASADA investigators drove the interview by (inter alia):

a) determining who to interview and when

b) giving directions to the AFL to summon interviewees and obtain information; which the AFL did

c) developing interview plans

d) conducting interviews of the interviewees summoned by the AFL by compulsive notice and with no privilege against self-incrimination; and

e) directing the AFL and Deloitte (who, retained by AFL, collected data from computers and phones) as to the material to be collected from servers and phones and the way the material should be examined, for example by identifying search terms to be applied and persons whose emails should be scrutinised

http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/25450/4-Aug-2014-Opening-Submissions.pdf

because that says exactly the opposite to what you're claiming. Please, show me something that actually backs up your assertions, I am dying to see it, given you've accused ME of ignoring things and going all BSE.

 

[I Rock]

oh really? you mean this?

2.4. ASADA investigators drove the interview by (inter alia):

a) determining who to interview and when

b) giving directions to the AFL to summon interviewees and obtain information; which the AFL did

c) developing interview plans

d) conducting interviews of the interviewees summoned by the AFL by compulsive notice and with no privilege against self-incrimination; and

e) directing the AFL and Deloitte (who, retained by AFL, collected data from computers and phones) as to the material to be collected from servers and phones and the way the material should be examined, for example by identifying search terms to be applied and persons whose emails should be scrutinised

http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/25450/4-Aug-2014-Opening-Submissions.pdf

or can you show me something that actually backs up your assertions?

I await with interest mate

I told you where to find it, it's on Hird's Court Documents.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

I told you where to find it, it's on Hird's Court Documents.

ah no, I can't find it. I've just shown you yet another example of proof that ASADA drove the interview. Either piss or get off the pot and admit you're talking out your arse. Because if you can't supply this then you are.

I am honestly interested in seeing it, so please, show me.

 

[I Rock]

ah no, I can't find it. I've just shown you yet another example of proof that ASADA drove the interview. Either piss or get off the pot and admit you're talking out your arse. Because if you can't supply this then you are.

I am honestly interested in seeing it, so please, show me.

Again Hird's Court Documents.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Again Hird's Court Documents.

link me up buddy

 

[Lance Uppercut]

and while you're at it, do you any comment on the submission I posted. You know, that one that claims unambiguously that ASADA led the interviews?

Any comment at all?

Bit ironic that you of all people are ignoring everything EXCEPT (what you claim to be) the word of James Hird. That is a remarkable irony

 

[I Rock]

link me up buddy

On phone. Will later if no one else has by then.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

On phone. Will later if no one else has by then.

thanks.

Bit weird that it would utterly contradict what I've quoted though, don't you think?

 

[Sunbot]

From today's testimony I would like to know what was the previous joint investigation that ASADA conducted.