ASADA Saga Thread

[Floyd]

Very Melbourne/AFL-centric.

Also, seems like a lot of leaks from ASADA.

Massively Hard done by in Melbourne...

The question is ( for you legal types out there) - if the Judge who reviewed the ASADA information found large flaws with the investigation, and the evidence is largely circumstantial (they may be able to prove substances - but not at all who got what and when)...will a Defence lawyer have any trouble mounting a case?

 

[CrankyShark]

Massively Hard done by in Melbourne...

The question is ( for you legal types out there) - if the Judge who reviewed the ASADA information found large flaws with the investigation, and the evidence is largely circumstantial (they may be able to prove substances - but not at all who got what and when)...will a Defence lawyer have any trouble mounting a case?

I'm not a legal type but I've done my best to follow the Essendon situation in particular. Even if the investigation is unlawful it is unlikely that the evidence will be struck out. Whether it is circumstantial is irrelevant.

The aim is to get evidence removed which requires the evidence to be more than obtained illegally. Obviously Essendon think they are going to be found guilty under the WADA code.

The judge who reviewed the ASADA information (Downes) is not acting in the capacity of a judge. The only action considering flaws in the investigation is with Essendon and is being reviewed by Justice Middleton.

 

[sharkyflit]

Asada is ****ed
Typical useless pathetic excuse for a government department
Blow the ****s up
Labor government scheme that's done nothing right

 

[CrankyShark]

Asada is ****ed
Typical useless pathetic excuse for a government department
Blow the ****s up
Labor government scheme that's done nothing right

ASADA was established by the Howard government. Howard pushed for the establishment of WADA and our own ASADA. It has nothing to do with Labor per se.

 

[fitz]

https://soundcloud.com/sen1116/rebecca-wilson-on-cronulla

Probably the thing I take most out of this is that there are different offers on the table for different players and some players have no offer at all.

 

[sharkyflit]

No your wrong actually yes it was under the libs but labor were the ones who executed the accusations poorly at essendon which started the whole **** up
Under gillard stupid bitch

 

[teflon77]

No your wrong actually yes it was under the libs but labor were the ones who executed the accusations poorly at essendon which started the whole **** up
Under gillard stupid bitch

My word you are one simple human.

 

[CrankyShark]

Probably the thing I take most out of this is that there are different offers on the table for different players and some players have no offer at all.

The obvious suggestion is very active and culpable involvement in the systemic program by a group of players. I would assume these players had a leadership role.

It casts a pall over the suggestion it is all Elkin and Flanno's fault.

 

[slide rule]

Probably the thing I take most out of this is that there are different offers on the table for different players and some players have no offer at all.

I remember at the start they were saying that some people continued to see Dank after he was moved on by the club.

Not sure how valid that is.

So much has been speculated about, it's hard to remember every detail now.

 

[sharkyflit]

Why is that mate?

 

[dylan the villian]

No your wrong actually yes it was under the libs but labor were the ones who executed the accusations poorly at essendon which started the whole **** up
Under gillard stupid bitch

really? FFS

 

[CrankyShark]

I remember at the start they were saying that some people continued to see Dank after he was moved on by the club.

Not sure how valid that is.

So much has been speculated about, it's hard to remember every detail now.

Even if they have done that, and I recall the accusations, this does not preclude them in providing substantial assistance and bringing others down with them. It suggests to me an active role in the systemic doping program.

It might be as simple as you say though, but I don't necessarily see why going outside the club precludes them from providing substantial assistance and discounts like everyone else.

 

[Floyd]

I'm not a legal type but I've done my best to follow the Essendon situation in particular. Even if the investigation is unlawful it is unlikely that the evidence will be struck out. Whether it is circumstantial is irrelevant.

The aim is to get evidence removed which requires the evidence to be more than obtained illegally. Obviously Essendon think they are going to be found guilty under the WADA code.

The judge who reviewed the ASADA information (Downes) is not acting in the capacity of a judge. The only action considering flaws in the investigation is with Essendon and is being reviewed by Justice Middleton.

I didn't realise that the flaws were specific to the Essendon case - seemingly it's no secret that the ASADA investigation wasn't greatly handled and I assumed that to be the case with us as well.

Anyways - parallels with Lance are mentioned, and that the circumstantial evidence pertaining to substances being around him were enough to see him go down, and yet with us the same (alleged) evidence exists re the existence of curtain substances and yet there is no evidence to say who got what and when....the law tends to favour a not guilty outcome when the potential for someone innocent getting convicted exists...ASADA really needs our guys to provide this assistance to tie some loose ends - our legal advice surely would be to continue to say nothing and let them try and prove it?

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

If any player is suspended on the grounds of seeking gear from dank outside the club, i hope thats made very public.

Its one thing to take danks word for it in a team/club situation but if you are gunna go do it outside the clubs confines, youd wanna check the details first.

 

[teflon77]

I find all the criticism of ASADA amusing. How many of you seasoned investigators have managed to solve anything with little to no co-operation from the accused? The fact that the players and coaches have stone walled them so hard is a massive reason why it has taken so long. Really don't see how ASADA is the enemy in all this.

 

[sharkyflit]

My word you are one simple human.

says the guy from Maitland

 

[slide rule]

Even if they have done that, and I recall the accusations, this does not preclude them in providing substantial assistance and bringing others down with them. It suggests to me an active role in the systemic doping program.

It might be as simple as you say though, but I don't necessarily see why going outside the club precludes them from providing substantial assistance and discounts like everyone else.

I don't know, I just remember a line of thought like that early on. There were people saying that ASADA were after the people that continued treatment, more so than the players that did it at the club.

I'm not sure that it really makes much difference though, unless they were doing different substances or they were heavily involved in the introduction to the club or something. I really don't know.

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

I didn't realise that the flaws were specific to the Essendon case - seemingly it's no secret that the ASADA investigation wasn't greatly handled and I assumed that to be the case with us as well.

Anyways - parallels with Lance are mentioned, and that the circumstantial evidence pertaining to substances being around him were enough to see him go down, and yet with us the same (alleged) evidence exists re the existence of curtain substances and yet there is no evidence to say who got what and when....the law tends to favour a not guilty outcome when the potential for someone innocent getting convicted exists...ASADA really needs our guys to provide this assistance to tie some loose ends - our legal advice surely would be to continue to say nothing and let them try and prove it?

Asada have followed a process (has been slow ill admit). However ideally what happened today, should have been the first anyone heard of it. Not 2 years of speculation until show cause notices were given.

Maybe the odd whisper here or there.

 

[teflon77]

I didn't realise that the flaws were specific to the Essendon case - seemingly it's no secret that the ASADA investigation wasn't greatly handled and I assumed that to be the case with us as well.

Anyways - parallels with Lance are mentioned, and that the circumstantial evidence pertaining to substances being around him were enough to see him go down, and yet with us the same (alleged) evidence exists re the existence of curtain substances and yet there is no evidence to say who got what and when....the law tends to favour a not guilty outcome when the potential for someone innocent getting convicted exists...ASADA really needs our guys to provide this assistance to tie some loose ends - our legal advice surely would be to continue to say nothing and let them try and prove it?

This is exactly the mentality I am talking about. You may be confusing criminal law with the ASADA investigation. What is the burden of proof they operate under? I would suggest it's not beyond reasonable doubt and leans more towards the balance of probabilities. And I don't think they had powerade in those syringes.

 

[teflon77]

says the guy from Maitland

I rest my case.