Lovett on Rape Charge

[markinUSA]

Hi

I thought I would post the link to the story today, because this is the first I've seen definitely saying he has been charged.

Sorry if it is elsewhere... I didn't see it.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 5830569433

[shmic_s]

Hi

I thought I would post the link to the story today, because this is the first I've seen definitely saying he has been charged.

Sorry if it is elsewhere... I didn't see it.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 5830569433

Was up earlier. Mods must have deleted it. Tells us what most people were suspecting. The next step that St Kilda football club takes will be of interest.

[markp]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

[saintly]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

i wonder if he can now be sacked? he still may be found innocent. so it will be interesting as what the saints will do.

I'm glad the saints indefinately suspened him. at least the we have not been relying on him over the preseason.

[degruch]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

i wonder if he can now be sacked? he still may be found innocent. so it will be interesting as what the saints will do.

I'm glad the saints indefinately suspened him. at least the we have not been relying on him over the preseason.

I suspect there will be a reconfirmation of his suspension - can't imagine the club can do much else unless he is proven guilty, unfortunately. He has a contract, I'm sure it still stands, charges or not. However, you'd hope the AFL Grievance process and the AFLPA will stop their action.

[Eastern]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

It would definately be a "trigger point". His appearance in the Magistrates Court on Friday will be another.

The club would be receiving very good advice from both their lawyers and the AFL. The release should not be far away !!

[plugger66]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

It would definately be a "trigger point". His appearance in the Magistrates Court on Friday will be another.

The club would be receiving very good advice from both their lawyers and the AFL. The release should not be far away !!

I will have a guess that nothing changes in the short term He will stay suspended but in the longer term they come to a financial agreement. I think we can just about be 100% assured that we will never see him again in a Saints jumper but I reckon most of us thought that on the 23rd of December.

[older saint]

Hopefully the AFL will now step in a temporaroily deregister him pending the outcome. This will protect their brand and also avoid StKilda being sued down the track by Lovett for a contract breach if he is acquitted.

[ThePunter]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.

As an organisation, I think St Kilda will look to hold this player to a higher standard, with regards to his employment, than a court of law will hold a person with regards to his freedom.

And that is why this player has played his last AFL game.

[Eastern]

Hopefully the AFL will now step in a temporaroily deregister him pending the outcome. This will protect their brand and also avoid StKilda being sued down the track by Lovett for a contract breach if he is acquitted.

That would be the VERY BEST outcome for St Kilda in the short to medium term !!

[bozza1980]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

i wonder if he can now be sacked? he still may be found innocent. so it will be interesting as what the saints will do.

I'm glad the saints indefinately suspened him. at least the we have not been relying on him over the preseason.

As a preface I must say I have no knowledge, inkling or belief as to the guilt or innocence of Andrew Lovett. I am making comment on the options as I see them for the St Kilda Football Club in response to this terrible situation.

If the reports are correct and he has been charged I think the club would be within their rights at this point to sever ties with him.

As the burden of proof is to prove someone guilty, being found Not Guilty is different to being proven Innocent. As such, I don't think the club should fear any backlash legally if he was not convicted and we had sacked him on the evidence of him being charged.

[degruch]

Hopefully the AFL will now step in a temporaroily deregister him pending the outcome. This will protect their brand and also avoid StKilda being sued down the track by Lovett for a contract breach if he is acquitted.

That would be the VERY BEST outcome for St Kilda in the short to medium term !!

Well, they did so for Cousins (but not others), they didn't for Stokes, so there's hardly a reliable precendent...who knows what they'll do? Given the nature of the charges and the AFL's stance against abuse to women, they should take the most stringent path possible.

[fingers]

D-E-R-E-G-I-S-T-E-R N-O-W

[markp]

St Kilda Football Club is expected to release a statement this afternoon on the player’s future.

Can we sack him now?

Yup, will be interesting....

It would definately be a "trigger point". His appearance in the Magistrates Court on Friday will be another.

The club would be receiving very good advice from both their lawyers and the AFL. The release should not be far away !!

I will have a guess that nothing changes in the short term He will stay suspended but in the longer term they come to a financial agreement. I think we can just about be 100% assured that we will never see him again in a Saints jumper but I reckon most of us thought that on the 23rd of December.

Agree with all of the above... my expectation is that the club will sack him as soon as their advice (legal, AFL) tells them they can.

Which may very well be now.

[bozza1980]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.

As an organisation, I think St Kilda will look to hold this player to a higher standard, with regards to his employment, than a court of law will hold a person with regards to his freedom.

And that is why this player has played his last AFL game.

I agree with you.

With regard to the courts and the like, Lovett deserves and retains the presumption of innocence as does every other person who finds themselves in his position.

At the end of the day though the burden of proof to lose your freedom is different to the burden of proof to lose your job.

This is not to say that he will lose his job, but just to say, that being found Not Guilty doesn't make your employers decision, to fire for being charged with the crime, an illegal decision.

I will be interested to see what decisions are made by the club, Lovett and/or the AFL in the coming days.

[older saint]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.

As an organisation, I think St Kilda will look to hold this player to a higher standard, with regards to his employment, than a court of law will hold a person with regards to his freedom.

And that is why this player has played his last AFL game.

Using that theory there may be 2 current saints no longer with us. Different administration I know but need to be careful on this type of stuff as it must have a flow on effect both forward and back.

[ThePunter]

They weren't charged

[older saint]

True but allegedly there was an out of court settlement regarding those matters which would imply something. Civil burden of proof is less than the criminal one

[suss]

I'm going to make a possibly contraversial point. It may get taken down, may get me infracted, but it's a well thought out point and it needs to be said.

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge. I must stress that I am not suggesting that he committed the crime which with he is now charged.

As an organisation, I think St Kilda will look to hold this player to a higher standard, with regards to his employment, than a court of law will hold a person with regards to his freedom.

And that is why this player has played his last AFL game.

I agree with you.

With regard to the courts and the like, Lovett deserves and retains the presumption of innocence as does every other person who finds themselves in his position.

At the end of the day though the burden of proof to lose your freedom is different to the burden of proof to lose your job.

This is not to say that he will lose his job, but just to say, that being found Not Guilty doesn't make your employers decision, to fire for being charged with the crime, an illegal decision.

I will be interested to see what decisions are made by the club, Lovett and/or the AFL in the coming days.

Gotta be careful - if we sack him too soon and he's found not guilty it might cost a packet. If we suspend his pay and then wait and if he's convicted, we could escape the contract without the risk.

I imagine it gives the club an excuse to suspend his pay, but sacking him going over the top - legally, and not morally, of course.

But that's a guess.

[Thinline]

So where are all the 'you wait and see the charges a gonna be dropped the cops have nuthin' to go on' types now?

pffft.

[meher baba]

Thanks goodness that policeman finally got back from his holidays (and thank goodness for the police that the now charged individual didn't commit any other alleged offences over the 6+ weeks)!!

(Of course I'm being unfair to the boys in blue, aren't I: obviously some new evidence has suddenly come to light that enabled charges to be laid. )

Anyway, end of story I would hope. He will remain suspended until a trial takes place, which presumably won't be for some time. We can all move on now.

[meher baba]

True but allegedly there was an out of court settlement regarding those matters which would imply something. Civil burden of proof is less than the criminal one

What exactly was it that you are alleging was "settled out of court"?

At around the time of the M&M allegations, three high profile players from other clubs were alleged to have made a large ($200k) out of court settlement in a civil case launched by a woman in Adelaide.

I do not recall any suggestion that St Kilda paid anybody anything in 2004: I'm not saying it didn't happen, but all I recall is that the police eventually dropped the charges for insufficient evidence.

[Solar]

news flash

club confirms that lovett was charged and the club is still working out what they will do. Will let the media know if anything else comes to light....

[chook23]

So where are all the 'you wait and see the charges a gonna be dropped the cops have nuthin' to go on' types now?

pffft.

I actually don't think there were that many.....

I must admit all along I was not of the view he was guilty because of his priors brigade either...their were many who had and have him guilty before court case...

I have said in many threads just let it take its course through the courts

I don't have access to the facts etc so I can't have opinion of guilt or innocence............that will be left to the jury

[bergholt]

A player has now been charged. Whether he has broken the law will now be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or not.

However, this player did something. He hasn't been arrested out of thin air. Something has made the police lay the charge.

a shedload of circumstantial evidence and no actual wrongdoing, maybe?

sure, he may well be guilty of something. but him being charged is no proof of absolutely anything. police, like the rest of us, can make mistakes. the courts exist so that once all the evidence is collected there's a body which decides if he did anything.

this changes absolutely nothing. he was under investigation. now he's been charged. neither of those should be grounds for the termination of his employment - that would be a horrible violation of his rights. much as i want it all to go away, this just shouldn't change a thing.