Nostradamus Lives Ross Lyon Sexual Harassment

[Taylor]

Well, that's not really the case. Site admins know which ISP users are using, and a rough location of where their router is - but it's certainly not exact. And that's also assuming that they're naive enough to surf the web these days without either using VPN or TOR.


But anyway, that's exactly my point....

If hypothetically, I had a privacy issue with BigFooty, where for example, BigFooty breached the Privacy Act and/or the APPs and I lodged an official complaint about the handling of my personal information (assuming BigFooty have revenue of over $3m per annum?) - something such as my personal information being shared without my knowledge, or my personal information being used for purposes that I didn't want it used for - and BigFooty found themselves in some seriously deep shit because of it, they'd most likely reach out in order to settle our problem.

They'd ask me what I want to make me 'happy', and then they'd make sure that once I was happy, I didn't tell anyone what happened. Because, you know, online privacy is critically important and a very, very serious matter.

So if I was happy with what BigFooty offered me in terms of making me 'happy', I'd sign a non-disclosure agreement. This means that I can't tell the world what BigFooty did wrong and in turn, make them legally accountable for their breaches. BigFooty would instigate this.

I wouldn't care if BigFooty spoke about it and told the truth publicly. Wouldn't bother me one bit. Why would I want, nor care whether BigFooty kept quiet about it?

NDAs don't have to be both ways. They don't have to ensure that both parties keep quiet.

The NDA between the complainant and Freo, did not have to extend to the complainant keeping quiet also. There is no reason for her to keep quiet. The only way her identity would come out, is if Freo talked. So the NDA only needed to extend to Freo - not her.

There is no way in hell that she would have requested that she, herself, also keep quiet. It's just illogical. And even if she wanted to keep quiet (which she actually probably does) - she doesn't have to sign anything to make that happen FFS! She just doesn't talk. Simple!



So why would she sign something, and end up with cash for it? Even if she requested cash to sign it - why would Freo agree to it? If they investigated it, as they say they did, and found nothing worthy of a sanction of any kind - why did they want her to sign something to keep quiet about it?
And if she asked for money to sign something, why did they agree to it? They should just stick to their own confidentiality agreement, and move on. Who cares if she talks publicly?

They absolutely should have agreed to an NDA on themselves - but there's no reason for them to hand over money in order to get her to sign one. Regardless of who requested it.


As I've said many times - I'm not saying they or Lyon did anything wrong, but they can't seriously sit there and act shocked when people ask why they handed over money for something that they claim was 'nothing to see here'!

They deserve everything they get for their stupidity.

It seems you might want to study up on pretrial mediation that allows cost saving from avoiding court.

Say for example someone didn't read a terms of use on sign up that excluded the ability to claim damages, but they insisted on taking it to court to get what they saw as justice - it might cost $100,000 in lawyers to save paying $20,000 in settlement before court. So paying $20,000 up front to finish it saves money.

 

[Bicco]

Well, that's not really the case. Site admins know which ISP users are using, and a rough location of where their router is - but it's certainly not exact. And that's also assuming that they're naive enough to surf the web these days without either using VPN or TOR.


But anyway, that's exactly my point....

If hypothetically, I had a privacy issue with BigFooty, where for example, BigFooty breached the Privacy Act and/or the APPs and I lodged an official complaint about the handling of my personal information (assuming BigFooty have revenue of over $3m per annum?) - something such as my personal information being shared without my knowledge, or my personal information being used for purposes that I didn't want it used for - and BigFooty found themselves in some seriously deep shit because of it, they'd most likely reach out in order to settle our problem.

They'd ask me what I want to make me 'happy', and then they'd make sure that once I was happy, I didn't tell anyone what happened. Because, you know, online privacy is critically important and a very, very serious matter.

So if I was happy with what BigFooty offered me in terms of making me 'happy', I'd sign a non-disclosure agreement. This means that I can't tell the world what BigFooty did wrong and in turn, make them legally accountable for their breaches. BigFooty would instigate this.

I wouldn't care if BigFooty spoke about it and told the truth publicly. Wouldn't bother me one bit. Why would I want, nor care whether BigFooty kept quiet about it?

NDAs don't have to be both ways. They don't have to ensure that both parties keep quiet.

The NDA between the complainant and Freo, did not have to extend to the complainant keeping quiet also. There is no reason for her to keep quiet. The only way her identity would come out, is if Freo talked. So the NDA only needed to extend to Freo - not her.

There is no way in hell that she would have requested that she, herself, also keep quiet. It's just illogical. And even if she wanted to keep quiet (which she actually probably does) - she doesn't have to sign anything to make that happen FFS! She just doesn't talk. Simple!



So why would she sign something, and end up with cash for it? Even if she requested cash to sign it - why would Freo agree to it? If they investigated it, as they say they did, and found nothing worthy of a sanction of any kind - why did they want her to sign something to keep quiet about it?
And if she asked for money to sign something, why did they agree to it? They should just stick to their own confidentiality agreement, and move on. Who cares if she talks publicly?

They absolutely should have agreed to an NDA on themselves - but there's no reason for them to hand over money in order to get her to sign one. Regardless of who requested it.


As I've said many times - I'm not saying they or Lyon did anything wrong, but they can't seriously sit there and act shocked when people ask why they handed over money for something that they claim was 'nothing to see here'!

They deserve everything they get for their stupidity.

This has all been addressed.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

FFS. Will you people just stop feeding the troll and let this thread die.


Now look what you made me do.

 

[elsleevador]

Lavender Bushranger and Al Pacino StCicatriz tell us, in your perfect world, what you’d like to see happen to the woman in question, Ross, Freo FC and Tayl0r.
P.S please don’t do anything bad to Taylor. I like her style.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Can’t believe so many Freo supporters are supporting a perpetrator over a victim.
It’s like , she has been paid off , all is square.

No.

 

[elsleevador]

Can’t believe so many Freo supporters are supporting a perpetrator over a victim.
It’s like , she has been paid off , all is square.

No.

Or we are supporting the FACT that the issue has been dealt with and we’re ready to move on.

 

[Stan8888]

Its a bit of pain when the hush money doesnt do its job.

 

[Dormammu]

Do you think Lyon is a perpetrator and not a victim?

I can't answer that question because I'm not privy to the facts. Hence why I believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

There, I answered your question. How about you do the same?

 

[PurpleHornet]

maybe. I for one will accept our new Sumich overlord

And as a trusted Big Footy poster, you can assist in rounding up others to toil in his underground footy caves?

 

[Monument Hills]

And as a trusted Big Footy poster, you can assist in rounding up others to toil in his underground footy caves?

I'm already busy harvesting spuds for the Sumich's

 

[ghostbat12]

I can't answer that question because I'm not privy to the facts. Hence why I believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

There, I answered your question. How about you do the same?

Innocence isn’t the unknown. It’s the level of guilt.

 

[Bicco]

Innocence isn’t the unknown. It’s the level of guilt.

What's a level of guilt? Surely a person is simply guilty or not.

 

[Dormammu]

Innocence isn’t the unknown. It’s the level of guilt.

Like being half-pregnant?

 

[tek87]

I am so glad Joel Wilkinson never played for us at the time. The victim mentality is so strong atm. me too says Joel, me too.

 

[ghostbat12]

Like being half-pregnant?

No, like degree of sexual harassment. If he got someone pregnant, that is sexual assault.

 

[Bicco]

No, like degree of sexual harassment. If he got someone pregnant, that is sexual assault.

You mean severity of the crime?
From what little info apparently exists it was a comment. Ross probably tried to make a joke and got it horribly wrong completely offending the poor young lady. Seems to have been dealt with to some level of satisfaction for both parties. Would be intereseted in firm evidence otherwise. Anything else is just idle gossip.

 

[Freo Quokkas]

The woman's partner is said to have got into an altercation or argument with Lyon, allegedly. - Hence the second complaint against him which was later withdrawn. Or, he told the Herald Sun he had such a complaint.

Originally, only the club and the woman's lawyers were involved in responding to the alleged sexual harassment dispute, not either of the state statutory bodies.

Gillon McLaughlin and AFL staff have been criticised by Caroline Wilson for not being transparent earlier about the matter, which would have resulted in a better outcome. "We keep finding out more about this story, when we think we've got all the answers from Fremantle and the AFL."

She feels the matter will not go away and that the Herald Sun are after Ross Lyon.
Though she doesn't know whether it's fair or not.

Craig Hutchinson thought Lyon did the right thing last Friday, getting on the front foot and appearing in front of the media. "He needs to address it head on."

 

[ghostbat12]

You mean severity of the crime?
From what little info apparently exists it was a comment. Ross probably tried to make a joke and got it horribly wrong completely offending the poor young lady. Seems to have been dealt with to some level of satisfaction for both parties. Would be intereseted in firm evidence otherwise. Anything else is just idle gossip.

No, info exists was that freo lied on

- who brought it to attention of club. Apparently not lyon.

- severity wasn’t a comment just about the dress.

- payout was in 6 figures, not low 5 figures which means the severity wasn’t low. I

- payout wasn’t just to keep an innocent incident out of headlines as then everyone would start making claims. Corporate world does not just do that (although they do protect each other).

 

[salim malik]

No, info exists was that freo lied on

- who brought it to attention of club. Apparently not lyon.

- severity wasn’t a comment just about the dress.

- payout was in 6 figures, not low 5 figures which means the severity wasn’t low. I

- payout wasn’t just to keep an innocent incident out of headlines as then everyone would start making claims. Corporate world does not just do that (although they do protect each other).

This is all rumour ,you have no idea what transpired so why make shit up or regurgitate old rumours. The NDA is working , get over it.

 

[Bicco]

No, info exists was that freo lied on

- who brought it to attention of club. Apparently not lyon.

- severity wasn’t a comment just about the dress.

- payout was in 6 figures, not low 5 figures which means the severity wasn’t low. I

- payout wasn’t just to keep an innocent incident out of headlines as then everyone would start making claims. Corporate world does not just do that (although they do protect each other).

You don't know that any of that is fact. Nobody does. If you do, I'd love to know how.

 

[Ceehook]

Why would Freo want confidentiality to protect themselves?

The media obviously understand why confidentiality is important to the claimant - but they don't understand why Freo would want protection? And nor do I.

they want to protect their brand
to do that they want to shut down any talk of the Ross Lyon incident
much of the football world and probably all of the non AFL would see Lyon and Fremantle FC as the same
and if Lyon has done something dirty or grubby it WILL reflect on the Football club as well
so the less fodder there is out there to discuss the topic will fade away
if it stays in the media and festers and over analysed it will quickly affect memberships and like dominos sponsors
then sales of auskick sized Freo jumpers drop because little Billy's mum doesn't want those colours in her house

just look back to the recent cricket scandal
all three players publically admitted guilt but couldn't comment on specifics because "there is a process to go through"
"there is a process" the Cricket Board had shut them down

the public and the media are very certain more than 3 players were at least aware if not involved
by the ACB effectively shutting down the topic it has faded

Back to the Lyon incident , all parties will want it to fade away quickly
Ross Lyon - for obvious reasons, it casts him in a very bad light and drags in family
Freo FC - as mentioned , its bad press for them will hit their bottom line
The AFL - bad for their brand, similar to Freo
The complainant - if her identity and/or the details of the case get out it can make her future employment prospects more and more bleak , she can become the target of trolls etc

 

[ghostbat12]

This is all rumour ,you have no idea what transpired so why make shit up or regurgitate old rumours. The NDA is working , get over it.

How is it a rumour when there is a NDA? What’s NDA for?

 

[ghostbat12]

You don't know that any of that is fact. Nobody does. If you do, I'd love to know how.

Well it involves Lyon. And a girl. And money changing hands.

Freo fans- nothing to see here haha. Play on!

 

[Bicco]

Well it involves Lyon. And a girl. And money changing hands.

Freo fans- nothing to see here haha. Play on!

There's clearly not nothing to see, just very little. The rest is in people's imagination.

 

[PurpleEyes]

Struth, I thought this topic was dead over a dozen pages ago when the Freo Trio had their press conference.

I pop back in here every day or so thinking there must be some new information that has been released ... but no, I just find a bunch of campaigners flogging a dead horse.

As much as you may want RTB to be sacked for a beat up nothing burger story, it's not going to happen. I thought that was obvious to most after Friday's media conference. It's time to move on peoples.