 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Nah, this "innocent until proven guilty" sentiment doesn't apply here.
The PED's were in their bodies, that's not in dispute - so it's more like being busted driving the car and claiming you didn't know it was stolen, than it being dumped on the front lawn.
The best chance you'd have would be to be charged with being in possession of stolen goods instead of theft itself - but you'd have to give up whoever stole the car and prove it as fact to be afforded this discount.
I'd love some opinions on whether some of you think it would be a good idea to point out where they sourced the drugs from as part of some sort if discount plea??
Especially David........
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
 |
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
the test proved them guilty David
the rest is just heresay, and im not convinced that it was taken with rec drugs, not convinced it was taken to cheat, definately convinced it wasnt in the meat!! |
No it didn't. It proved that the substance was in their system.
It's the equivalent of the police finding a stolen car on your front lawn. Is that proof that you're guilty of stealing it? What if you bought it from a used car dealer, or what if someone else dumped it on your front lawn and took off? Merely establishing that the car is there is not proof of guilt.
Now, if you happened to be buying a few grams of cocaine on a regular basis and your dealer decided (without your permission) that your front yard would be a good venue for his latest joyride, would that make you a car thief? "We hereby sentence Think Positive to the harshest possible penalty for car thievery; not because she was actually involved in the car theft, but because we need to remind impressionable members of society that drugs are bad."  |
You're confusing the standards of proof and evidence required in criminal proceedings with those of civil ones. They aren't the same things.
Under WADA the drugs are in their system so they're guilty.
They can try to mitigate sentence or even get off by providing their case, but the onus on them is to prove their "innocence" .
The soft illicit drugs policy has unintentionally provided incentive for players to use illicit drugs as there is/was less consequence than having a night on the piss. This even hopefully is a wake up call to the players who've been dancing with the devil.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I don't think David's claiming that they are not guilty of breaching the WADA code, but the wider question of whether they are guilty of cheating. That has not been proven.
We know that the WADA code allows for athletes careers to be ended without any proof of cheating. The question is whether that's right.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | I don't think David's claiming that they are not guilty of breaching the WADA code, but the wider question of whether they are guilty of cheating. That has not been proven.
We know that the WADA code allows for athletes careers to be ended without any proof of cheating. The question is whether that's right. |
Right or wrong, it IS, none of us have the power to change it and I personally have little interest in spending my time debating issues I can't influence or change. We could all sit round and discuss what's right and wrong for weeks without reaching an actual actionable outcome. I have zero interest in that process.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Right or wrong, our country's refugee policy IS. Right or wrong, marriage inequality IS. Right or wrong, AFL players getting wasted in the off-season IS. The fact that something is doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed; and if you passionately disagree with something, you should do what you can to fight against it.
If you want to sit on your hands, that's fine too; but don't confuse your apathy with the impossibility of social change. For better or for worse, change is happening all the time. It starts with argument.
| King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
Including names of dealers, friends, acquaintances, etc.......??
How do you think that would work out for them?? |
I dunno, let's be imaginative. A confidential hearing; witnesses offered anonymity and strict no-liability clauses.
I'm not saying it's an easy thing to negotiate, but I thoroughly reject the attitude of "it's too hard to prove so throw the book at them anyway". They deserve to be given the right to at least try to make their case.
I'm well aware that innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. The question is why, when that's a cherished principle in other areas of society. Keep in mind, it's not just cocaine users that could face this injustice; it's also people who might eat dodgy meat on an overseas trip or get their drink spiked in the nightclub. However unlikely those possibilities are, if they happen, I think it's only right that players be given some opportunity to defend themselves.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
makri 
Joined: 29 Oct 2005
Location: Clifton Hill
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Right or wrong, our country's refugee policy IS. Right or wrong, marriage inequality IS. Right or wrong, AFL players getting wasted in the off-season IS. The fact that something is doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed; and if you passionately disagree with something, you should do what you can to fight against it.
If you want to sit on your hands, that's fine too; but don't confuse your apathy with the impossibility of social change. For better or for worse, change is happening all the time. It starts with argument.
| King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
Including names of dealers, friends, acquaintances, etc.......??
How do you think that would work out for them?? |
I dunno, let's be imaginative. A confidential hearing; witnesses offered anonymity and strict no-liability clauses.
I'm not saying it's an easy thing to negotiate, but I thoroughly reject the attitude of "it's too hard to prove so throw the book at them anyway". They deserve to be given the right to at least try to make their case.
I'm well aware that innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. The question is why, when that's a cherished principle in other areas of society. Keep in mind, it's not just cocaine users that could face this injustice; it's also people who might eat dodgy meat on an overseas trip or get their drink spiked in the nightclub. However unlikely those possibilities are, if they happen, I think it's only right that players be given some opportunity to defend themselves. |
"Cocaine users" and "injustice" in the same sentence. Funniest thing I've seen all day.
_________________
Magpie Jumper Gallery:
https://www.instagram.com/magpiejumpers/ |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Right or wrong, our country's refugee policy IS. Right or wrong, marriage inequality IS. Right or wrong, AFL players getting wasted in the off-season IS. The fact that something is doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed; and if you passionately disagree with something, you should do what you can to fight against it.
If you want to sit on your hands, that's fine too; but don't confuse your apathy with the impossibility of social change. For better or for worse, change is happening all the time. It starts with argument.
| King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
Including names of dealers, friends, acquaintances, etc.......??
How do you think that would work out for them?? |
I dunno, let's be imaginative. A confidential hearing; witnesses offered anonymity and strict no-liability clauses.
I'm not saying it's an easy thing to negotiate, but I thoroughly reject the attitude of "it's too hard to prove so throw the book at them anyway". They deserve to be given the right to at least try to make their case.
I'm well aware that innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. The question is why, when that's a cherished principle in other areas of society. Keep in mind, it's not just cocaine users that could face this injustice; it's also people who might eat dodgy meat on an overseas trip or get their drink spiked in the nightclub. However unlikely those possibilities are, if they happen, I think it's only right that players be given some opportunity to defend themselves. |
Don't hurt yourself charging those windmills on your donkey there Don.  Feel free to fight against gravity too if you like, or you could pick things you may be able to actually do something with, which I referred to with being able to influence or change things.
And it's not just cocaine users, it's a large number and they do have an opportunity to defend themselves. You make it sound like they're tried convicted and shot without having any input FFS.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | I don't think David's claiming that they are not guilty of breaching the WADA code, but the wider question of whether they are guilty of cheating. That has not been proven.
We know that the WADA code allows for athletes careers to be ended without any proof of cheating. The question is whether that's right. |
Right or wrong, it IS, none of us have the power to change it and I personally have little interest in spending my time debating issues I can't influence or change. We could all sit round and discuss what's right and wrong for weeks without reaching an actual actionable outcome. I have zero interest in that process. |
You do know we're on the internet, right?
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | I don't think David's claiming that they are not guilty of breaching the WADA code, but the wider question of whether they are guilty of cheating. That has not been proven.
We know that the WADA code allows for athletes careers to be ended without any proof of cheating. The question is whether that's right. |
Right or wrong, it IS, none of us have the power to change it and I personally have little interest in spending my time debating issues I can't influence or change. We could all sit round and discuss what's right and wrong for weeks without reaching an actual actionable outcome. I have zero interest in that process. |
You do know we're on the internet, right? |
Pay that. 
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby 
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Very interesting to hear people here talking about freely agreeing to have their teenage school children drug tested. Jesus! Has it really come to this? And anyway, you were all talking about f...n private schools who already rip off the tax paying public senseless anyway, why would you pay another $400 to have your boys drug tested? Am I living in some parallel universe? It seems totally extraordinary to me.......but I do digress.
I do feel for Lachie and Josh. I had very high hopes for Lachie Keeffe who almost singlehandedly held up our backline in 2012 when everybody else went down injured. Both boys made dumb choices and by dumb I mean they bought drugs from an untrusted source. Admittedly, I am presuming they didn't have a history with the drug seller on that fateful Sunday night, but my drug taking friends all tell me they jealously guard the identity of their drug suppliers. They value the drugs supplied and know they are not buying crap or worse, dangerous crap.
From this I believe Lachie and Josh were relative cleanskins and not regular coke users. I could be way off beam here; perhaps both boys were introduced to the seller by teammates. I keep hearing that two other Collingwood players were with them and probably took the same drugs. Lucky boys.
So two cleanskins and very well liked and respected players, made a big mistake and took illicit drugs laced with PEDs. Very, very unlucky to be tested the next day. Was this testing unusual? Was there any talk of the boys being targeted?
Let's assume they were just very unlucky. What should happen to them? They have no chance to really defend themselves because they can't prove what they ingested. PEDs in the system of AFL players is a two year ban and now a four year ban.
The lesson must be, if you are an AFL player following your dream, being highly paid and given every possible advantage in your chosen career, then stay away from drugs during the 11 months of the year they you are playing and training.
If you choose to do speed or ice or whatever, then you risk losing that career.
From this week we probably won't be as sympathetic; I won't be.
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
the test proved them guilty David
the rest is just heresay, and im not convinced that it was taken with rec drugs, not convinced it was taken to cheat, definately convinced it wasnt in the meat!! |
No it didn't. It proved that the substance was in their system.
It's the equivalent of the police finding a stolen car on your front lawn. Is that proof that you're guilty of stealing it? What if you bought it from a used car dealer, or what if someone else dumped it on your front lawn and took off? Merely establishing that the car is there is not proof of guilt.
Now, if you happened to be buying a few grams of cocaine on a regular basis and your dealer decided (without your permission) that your front yard would be a good venue for his latest joyride, would that make you a car thief? "We hereby sentence Think Positive to the harshest possible penalty for car thievery; not because she was actually involved in the car theft, but because we need to remind impressionable members of society that drugs are bad." |
Really? Your equating parking a car on someone's front lawn, with having drugs in your system? It wasn't a date rape drug!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| King Monkey wrote: | Nah, this "innocent until proven guilty" sentiment doesn't apply here.
The PED's were in their bodies, that's not in dispute - so it's more like being busted driving the car and claiming you didn't know it was stolen, than it being dumped on the front lawn.
The best chance you'd have would be to be charged with being in possession of stolen goods instead of theft itself - but you'd have to give up whoever stole the car and prove it as fact to be afforded this discount.
I'd love some opinions on whether some of you think it would be a good idea to point out where they sourced the drugs from as part of some sort if discount plea??
Especially David........ |
yeah giving up drug dealers is always a good idea! That would go well. Unless of course your totally innocent and can prove it and the. Hide really well.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Right or wrong, our country's refugee policy IS. Right or wrong, marriage inequality IS. Right or wrong, AFL players getting wasted in the off-season IS. The fact that something is doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed; and if you passionately disagree with something, you should do what you can to fight against it.
If you want to sit on your hands, that's fine too; but don't confuse your apathy with the impossibility of social change. For better or for worse, change is happening all the time. It starts with argument.
| King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ No, I'd expect them to fight the case using whatever evidence they can muster.
This, of course, is presuming that we throw the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' out the window. |
Including names of dealers, friends, acquaintances, etc.......??
How do you think that would work out for them?? |
I dunno, let's be imaginative. A confidential hearing; witnesses offered anonymity and strict no-liability clauses.
I'm not saying it's an easy thing to negotiate, but I thoroughly reject the attitude of "it's too hard to prove so throw the book at them anyway". They deserve to be given the right to at least try to make their case.
I'm well aware that innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. The question is why, when that's a cherished principle in other areas of society. Keep in mind, it's not just cocaine users that could face this injustice; it's also people who might eat dodgy meat on an overseas trip or get their drink spiked in the nightclub. However unlikely those possibilities are, if they happen, I think it's only right that players be given some opportunity to defend themselves. |
Didn't they get the opportunity? Did t they make the case? Did t they say they took party drugs and it must have been cu with Peds? Oh I forgot the dogdy meat one! Seriously were you born yesterday? They seem to be happy to take the red drug thing on the chin and let it go. I wonder why? Maybe it's the truth, or maybe the truth is worse?
I also agree with the lol at the coccaine users and injustice in the same sentence thing! They are warned over and over. They gambled and lost, they don't get the chips back. They need to earn their places back. And yeah I'm sure there is plenty out there going " oh shot, how lucky was I it wasn't me" that doesn't make it right.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
On the contrary, I think that's fantastic news. Perhaps the "side by side" motto is something the club takes seriously after all.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
