De-Belin

[tony soprano]

Its a joke.
If he gets acquitted he has lost 3 years of prime first grade. I would sue the nrl for lost income.
If he is found guilty then punish.
If I'm awaiting trial and on bail, I would be working.
Bringing the game into disrepute is just fluff.

He’s still getting paid. Might have lost a tpa.
Hasn’t st George already challenged nrl about being stood down . Or did they pull out of it

De belin challenged the policy in court and lost.

 

[clontarfkid]

All very subjective,but NRL didnt anticipate this length of time to ascertain guilt..but probably shld have,as some of these issues take quite a while.
JDB was indeed being paid by Dragons(think his contract finished this year?),who surely have a case against NRL regardless of the outcome of this trial..the club shldnt be paying the $2mill paid to JDB as a consequence of a Peter Beattie virtue signalling whim
..and if JDB is indeed found not guilty(and I suspect he will be..too much reasonable doubt..but who knows?),he has a huge damages case against NRL available to him who effectively truncated several years of his future career... plus significant reputational damage
So NRL is gonna pay big time!!

 

[tony soprano]

Legit never been on a jury before, been invited, rocked up and told I wasn’t needed because I was too young at the time

But why don’t they have an uneven amount of people in a jury to stop deadlocks happening? Or does it not work like that?

From what I remember they all give their okAy for the decision.

 

[Holman Barnes #1 Fan]

Imagine if they let him play. They would have allowed an alleged rapist to play for 2 years. Would have been incredibly bad PR.

 

[Nelson]

Legit never been on a jury before, been invited, rocked up and told I wasn’t needed because I was too young at the time

But why don’t they have an uneven amount of people in a jury to stop deadlocks happening? Or does it not work like that?

It requires a unanimous verdict, so a hung jury can be 10-2 or 6-6 or 5-7 for example. There is provision for what is called a "majority verdict", but that only becomes available after at least 8 hours of deliberation and a judge does not always give a majority verdict direction. A "majority verdict" allows for 11-1 (in a jury of 12).

 

[sleeve]

He has not been covicted.That is what is wrong The law of the land says-Innocent until proven guity.This is up there with burning witches.

 

[Nelson]

He was acting like a grub regardless so couldn’t care less that he is being punished even if ended in jail.

I’ve been following the case closely which similar to Hayne case in that one person says there was consent and other states there is not.


To the legal eagles out there what are the element of Rape, do they look into the mind of the victim or defendant for consent?


If it’s the defendant it would be pretty difficult to prove, when the defendant saying I didn’t do it.


The injuries for Hayne Victim I guess would not help his case.


Any thoughts on where the cases may go?


I fully support the nrl policy why should nrl be put threw the mud when player made their bed.

The elements of sexual assault are that a person:

- Has sexual intercourse with another person;
- Without the consent of the other person; and
- Knows the other person is not consenting.

Knowledge of lack of consent can be proven in NSW by proving that:

- the person knows that the alleged victim does not consent to the sexual activity (actual knowledge), or
- the person is reckless as to whether the alleged victim consents to the sexual activity (recklessness), or
- the person has no reasonable grounds for believing that the alleged victim consents to the sexual activity (no reasonable grounds).

So you need to prove that the victim has not freely and voluntarily agreed to the sexual activity and you also need to prove that the accused knew that, was reckless about it or had no objective grounds on which to think the victim was consenting. Often knowledge of lack of consent is inferred from what an accused said or did at the time of the offence, or from how the victim communicated their lack of consent.

 

[sleeve]

I bet all the other codes are laughing at us.I also bet the other codes are not going to follow our example. THEY ARE TOO SMART

 

[Nelson]

He has not been covicted.That is what is wrong The law of the land says-Innocent until proven guity.This is up there with burning witches.

The law also says that people can be locked up before they've been found guilty by being refused bail. It also says that people can be banned from certain professions, or from working with children, without ever having been found guilty by a jury. This is hardly the most extreme example of an imposition on someone who has not been found guilty of an offence.

 

[sleeve]

The law had no say in this.This was brought in by people with no legal knowledge just to appease sponsors.NFL,SOCCER,BAKETBALL,AFL-AND OTHERS,HAVE NOT FOLLOWED.---WHY-BECAUSE IT IS WRONG.

 

[Curaeus]

There's an old saying in the law that justice delayed is justice denied. With a retrial next April followed by possible appeals from either side the case could easily drag on into late 2021. As everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty, de Belin should really be allowed to play pending a final outcome.

 

[PJ_]

Its a joke.
If he gets acquitted he has lost 3 years of prime first grade. I would sue the nrl for lost income.
If he is found guilty then punish.
If I'm awaiting trial and on bail, I would be working.
Bringing the game into disrepute is just fluff.

That’s not the NRL fault

At this stage its not his either.

 

[Speed2burn]

Legit never been on a jury before, been invited, rocked up and told I wasn’t needed because I was too young at the time

But why don’t they have an uneven amount of people in a jury to stop deadlocks happening? Or does it not work like that?

From what I remember they all give their okAy for the decision.

Legit never been on a jury before, been invited, rocked up and told I wasn’t needed because I was too young at the time

But why don’t they have an uneven amount of people in a jury to stop deadlocks happening? Or does it not work like that?

It requires a unanimous verdict, so a hung jury can be 10-2 or 6-6 or 5-7 for example. There is provision for what is called a "majority verdict", but that only becomes available after at least 8 hours of deliberation and a judge does not always give a majority verdict direction. A "majority verdict" allows for 11-1 (in a jury of 12).

Cheers fellas, that makes sense

 

[PJ_]

Imagine if they let him play. They would have allowed an alleged rapist to play for 2 years. Would have been incredibly bad PR.

Alleged.
The nrl didn't know what the court outcome would be?

 

[PJ_]

Its a joke.
If he gets acquitted he has lost 3 years of prime first grade. I would sue the nrl for lost income.
If he is found guilty then punish.
If I'm awaiting trial and on bail, I would be working.
Bringing the game into disrepute is just fluff.

He’s still getting paid. Might have lost a tpa.
Hasn’t st George already challenged nrl about being stood down . Or did they pull out of it

Still losing income.
Bonus payments for making finals, origin, tests

 

[Holman Barnes #1 Fan]

Imagine if they let him play. They would have allowed an alleged rapist to play for 2 years. Would have been incredibly bad PR.

Alleged.
The nrl didn't know what the court outcome would be?

Okay cool let's just let a guy with that hanging over his head continue playing in the NRL. I'm sure that will go over well with a lot of people. No way would anyone walk away from the game in that situation.

 

[PJ_]

Imagine if they let him play. They would have allowed an alleged rapist to play for 2 years. Would have been incredibly bad PR.

Alleged.
The nrl didn't know what the court outcome would be?

Okay cool let's just let a guy with that hanging over his head continue playing in the NRL. I'm sure that will go over well with a lot of people. No way would anyone walk away from the game in that situation.

Who's to say how it would affect him. If he knew he was innocent then it might not bother him. The nrl is not the criminal court, that's all I'm saying. How can you punish someone for allegedly doing something?

 

[tony soprano]

The law had no say in this.This was brought in by people with no legal knowledge just to appease sponsors.NFL,SOCCER,BAKETBALL,AFL-AND OTHERS,HAVE NOT FOLLOWED.---WHY-BECAUSE IT IS WRONG.

Actually the law said it was okay when de belin challenge the policy at court.

 

[sleeve]

We all differ in our opinions.I hate sexual assault and think penalties should be doubled.But the stand down rule is absurd and morally wrong. Only time will tell ,.

 

[tony soprano]

Its a joke.
If he gets acquitted he has lost 3 years of prime first grade. I would sue the nrl for lost income.
If he is found guilty then punish.
If I'm awaiting trial and on bail, I would be working.
Bringing the game into disrepute is just fluff.

That’s not the NRL fault

At this stage its not his either.

Actually his actions led him here.