The bad behaviour thread

surmo13 wrote:

do you... know how this stuff works? somebody isn't charged with rape because some-one says "he did a rape!" and everybody just goes 'well off to court then, i guess', the police investigate the claim and need to be able to obtain enough evidence to be able to argue in a court of law that he did what he is accused of before they even think of bringing charges. Rape charges have by far the worst percentage of accusations to court cases, according to a survey from the american justice system, only 4% of rape accusations actually make it to prosecutors, so I'd wager that the players that can manage a night out without sticking their dick in some-one will have absolutely nothing to fear.

Normally Pieman falls on the simpleton side of the equation when you two have a difference of opinion but this is a fairly daft comment.

Basically by your logic, there is no point even having a trial as by the time someone is charged, it is fairly cut and dry........wow.

Have you considered that the reason these trial take so long, is the amount of time and care that is required to get to a fair and just answer that doesn't unnecessarily & unfairly impact the innocent party (whomever that may be).

Now because of self interest and media pressure the NRL has shat all over that well thought out, tried and tested process.

leaguegod wrote:

i would say he can't be part of it

I'd think so too, so they scramble to sign a kid today, still need 1 more by June 30, things will get interesting if his court case still hasn't been decided by then.

No Worries wrote:

I'd think so too, so they scramble to sign a kid today, still need 1 more by June 30, things will get interesting if his court case still hasn't been decided by then.

yeah i'd have to think tigers would now have to plan as if he doesn't play this year

leaguegod wrote:

yeah i'd have to think tigers would now have to plan as if he doesn't play this year

So we still pay him ? He signed a 3 year contract. Surely we've been paying him since December. So we have to pay 31 players on our reduced cap ? This is where the NRL start to look bad and things seem knee jerk, because you have Manly in the same boat with Dylan walker but the clubs not being impacted consistently.

No Worries wrote:

So we still pay him  ? He signed a 3 year contract. Surely we've been paying him since December. So we have to pay 31 players on our reduced cap ? This is where the NRL start to look bad and things seem knee jerk, because you have Manly in the same boat with Dylan walker but the clubs not being impacted consistently.

Wouldn't every NRL contract be signed conditional on it being registered with the NRL? If that is the case then this is one of those cases where it's really unlucky for Zane if he is found not guilty, but contractually the club probably doesn't have to pay him until the contract is registered.

Dip wrote:

I'm happy to go along with Surmo (I think it was) here. In a case as serious as this, I'm happy to go with the decision that where the police have investigated it and believe the lady in question, then I think it is much better that the interest of the game and the several hundred other players are protected by JDB sitting on the sideline on full pay rather than risk a rapist playing.

IF the judge/magistrate believes JDB and he is found innocent, then JDB should have the right to seek damages from the said lady for his potential loss of earnings and mental anguish or whatever.

The NRL's job is to protect the game. I can't criticise them for choosing to protect the broadcast rights, and rights of all other players by sitting the player out, which is a far bigger risk to me, than the risk of the game not being as good because a potentially innocent player, one of the best players in the game, is not able to showcase his skills.

Its all well and good that the detective believes her, but it should be largely irrelevant. Its what the jury thinks that is important.
We have differing optinions mate, all good. I think he should be free to play until the verdict comes out. 2 sides to the coin.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Normally Pieman falls on the simpleton side of the equation when you two have a difference of opinion but this is a fairly daft comment.

Basically by your logic, there is no point even having a trial as by the time someone is charged, it is fairly cut and dry........wow.

Have you considered that the reason these trial take so long, is the amount of time and care that is required to get to a fair and just answer that doesn't unnecessarily & unfairly impact the innocent party (whomever that may be).

Now because of self interest and media pressure the NRL has shat all over that well thought out, tried and tested process.

You're not serious right? Where did i say evidence meant automatic guilt? Every single case that goes to court has some sort of evidence, every single one, if there is no evidence, there is no trial, the very fact that he is charged means the police have something on him that they feel they can successfully argue to a jury, whether that jury ends up agreeing with that argument is a different story that i'm not talking about.

surely, you can't actually think that a prosecutor can walk into a court and just go 'well we have absolutely no proof of the incident in questiontaking place, but she said he did it, i rest my case'

Dip wrote:

I'm happy to go along with Surmo (I think it was) here. In a case as serious as this, I'm happy to go with the decision that where the police have investigated it and believe the lady in question, then I think it is much better that the interest of the game and the several hundred other players are protected by JDB sitting on the sideline on full pay rather than risk a rapist playing.

IF the judge/magistrate believes JDB and he is found innocent, then JDB should have the right to seek damages from the said lady for his potential loss of earnings and mental anguish or whatever.

The NRL's job is to protect the game. I can't criticise them for choosing to protect the broadcast rights, and rights of all other players by sitting the player out, which is a far bigger risk to me, than the risk of the game not being as good because a potentially innocent player, one of the best players in the game, is not able to showcase his skills.

As Pieman has alluded to JDB is vehemently denying he is guilty and the lady involved obviously also has a reasonable case.

In this instance or others, where it can't yet be proven or disproven i.e. they may have had sex but it is yet to be determined whether it was consensual or not; it seems blatantly clear to me that a neutral stance needs to be taken.

And the neutral position here is that everyone goes about their business.

The argument that the women suffers seeing the player on TV is ridiculous to me.
He's clearly not going to be having a good time and/or living a normal life with this hanging over his head and I imagine a woman who has been raped would be long odds to be even watching him play football.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

It seems blatantly clear to me that a neutral stance needs to be taken.

how is this not neutral? they aren't backing him and allowing him to continue to live in the limelight as if nothing has happened, they aren't condemning him and trying to sack him or suspend him without pay, they basically said we don't know if you're innocent or guilty, so until the matter is settled we'll pay your full salary and you can do everything you usually do, except for the duties where you would be representing our brand.

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Normally Pieman falls on the simpleton side of the equation when you two have a difference of opinion but this is a fairly daft comment.

Basically by your logic, there is no point even having a trial as by the time someone is charged, it is fairly cut and dry........wow.

Have you considered that the reason these trial take so long, is the amount of time and care that is required to get to a fair and just answer that doesn't unnecessarily & unfairly impact the innocent party (whomever that may be).

Now because of self interest and media pressure the NRL has shat all over that well thought out, tried and tested process.

Dude, it is by nowhere near a tried and tested process. A very small amount of rape accusations ever make it to court. Women don't report things when they happen because of this kind of bullshit. Usually, it comes down to proving beyond doubt that she said no. Cmon think about it. Usually these things don't happen where there is CCTV footage; the woman who probably all they want to do is have a shower needs to go straight to the hospital for a test, has to face being cross-examined by lawyers who will stop at nothing to find some minor loophole to doubt what she says. How much confidence would you have in this tried and tested process?

More than that for the months and years it does go to court all you have is people publically commenting on how unfair it is to the man involved. The charges are dropped not because the man is innocent but because the charges cannot be proven beyond the benefit of the doubt. When you consider that only a very small percentage of rape claims ever make to this stage. There is a problem. Or are you claiming that a vast percentage of women make these things up for no reason?

Spare me this innocent before being proven guilty nonsense you are going on with. Noone at any stage has said that JDB is guilty. They have just proposed a system, whereby the onus of proving innocence is a little more balanced. The message is clear.. make sure you have established and maintained enthusiastic consent. This is not hard to do at all. If you are going to put yourself into situations where that is going to be really hard to do 2 x 100kg+ athletes vs a tiny woman at the house of a relative of the athlete, where she is reporting injuries to a hospital afterwards, then you are probably going to want to make sure that you have taken extra special care to make 100% sure that she consented. If you do this, you won't be charged with rape and you can keep playing till your heart's content.

Buramada wrote:

Dude, it is by nowhere near a tried and tested process. A very small amount of rape accusations ever make it to court. Women don't report things when they happen because of this kind of bullshit. Usually, it comes down to proving beyond doubt that she said no. Cmon think about it. Usually these things don't happen where there is CCTV footage; the woman who probably all they want to do is have a shower needs to go straight to the hospital for a test, has to face being cross-examined by lawyers who will stop at nothing to find some minor loophole to doubt what she says. How much confidence would you have in this tried and tested process?

More than that for the months and years it does go to court all you have is people publically commenting on how unfair it is to the man involved. The charges are dropped not because the man is innocent but because the charges cannot be proven beyond the benefit of the doubt. When you consider that only a very small percentage of rape claims ever make to this stage. There is a problem. Or are you claiming that a vast percentage of women make these things up for no reason?

Spare me this innocent before being proven guilty nonsense you are going on with. Noone at any stage has said that JDB is guilty. They have just proposed a system, whereby the onus of proving innocence is a little more balanced. The message is clear.. make sure you have established and maintained enthusiastic consent. This is not hard to do at all. If you are going to put yourself into situations where that is going to be really hard to do 2 x 100kg+ athletes vs a tiny woman at the house of a relative of the athlete, where she is reporting injuries to a hospital afterwards, then you are probably going to want to make sure that you have taken extra special care to make 100% sure that she consented. If you do this, you won't be charged with rape and you can keep playing till your heart's content.

I am going to reply to comment on your behalf so you don't have to

"You are obviously an imbecile who does not think innocent being proven guilty is important. {{something highly unintelligent that does not respond the what was previously said}} {{another ill-considered insult}} {{chicks beer footy}}"

surmo13 wrote:

how is this not neutral? they aren't backing him and allowing him to continue to live in the limelight as if nothing has happened, they aren't condemning him and trying to sack him or suspend him without pay, they basically said we don't know if you're innocent or guilty, so until the matter is settled we'll pay your full salary and you can do everything you usually do, except for the duties where you would be representing our brand.

Dip's mention of Laffranchi is the perfect example of this.

He would not have been able to reach the pinnacle of his entire career, had the NRL stepped in as they have with JDB.
It's not a case of well at least he is being paid......that is a life changing decision purely on the back of evidence of two people having sex, not evidence of any guilt.

It's clearly not the neutral position and the NRL's claim of brand protection is rubbish when it is an individual matter.

The NRL's problem is purely that they have had a string of individual matters and hence people are rightly asking what the fuck is going on.

Rather than punishing individual's before they are proven to be guilty or innocent, the NRL would see more benefit in punishing the fuck out of blokes that are eventually found guilty.

Even better still they should be proactive and by that I don't just mean more education - better approaches are required.

Standing JDB down is a weak attempt at masking their ineptitude.

Buramada wrote:

I am going to reply to comment on your behalf so you don't have to

"You are obviously an imbecile who does not think innocent being proven guilty is important. {{something highly unintelligent that does not respond the what was previously said}} {{another ill-considered insult}} {{chicks beer footy}}"

Thanks for generalising my comments and opinion.....which is almost ironic given the way you replied on my behalf.

All I have been suggesting is a neutral stance that is fair to both parties, until the matter is resolved.

Clearly you fall on the other side of the ledger with no care for one of the parties involved and want the NRL to act above their capability, which I can't possibly agree with.

Not much more to say beyond that and I don't particularly want to waste my time discussing what should be a robust discussion with someone that can only respond as above.

Tyrone May sex tape floating about apparently.

The off season that keeps on giving. It's said that the woman is struck in the video, hopefully that doesn't blow up as abuse when it's just rough sex

Honeysett wrote:The off season that keeps on giving. It's said that the woman is struck in the video, hopefully that doesn't blow up as abuse when it's just rough sex

the sex video - just him pumping a fairly decent sort, slapping her on the titty
The second one i have - someone with a very similar forearm tat to him is pretty rough with a chick, calls her a name and he forces her head down on another blokes dick

Pm me some links pie man.

Asking for a friend

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Thanks for generalising my comments and opinion.....which is almost ironic given the way you replied on my behalf.

All I have been suggesting is a neutral stance that is fair to both parties, until the matter is resolved.

Clearly you fall on the other side of the ledger with no care for one of the parties involved and want the NRL to act above their capability, which I can't possibly agree with.

Not much more to say beyond that and I don't particularly want to waste my time discussing what should be a robust discussion with someone that can only respond as above.

The accuracy of my generalised comment was remarkably accurate. Who would have thought? Got us some peace too

Oh a NRL player makes a sex tape, these guys must think they are JohnHolmes, RonJeremy or Mandingo

Pieman wrote:

the sex video - just him pumping a fairly decent sort, slapping her on the titty
The second one i have - someone with a very similar forearm tat to him is pretty rough with a chick, calls her a name and he forces her head down on another blokes dick

Haven't gone to the trouble of pausing either video or studying Tyrone's forearm. At a couple of watches it looks similar but couldn't say for sure.

No I don't have a link, they're on messenger

UPDATE: I felt in only necessary in the interest of the forum to employ the pause button. There is a pic online of him playing against St George where his arm is at the same / similar angle which makes the 1st video pretty conclusive. The 2nd is still 2 quick and out of focus, but is definitely  a possibility. But with the 2nd you do get voice as well