Jack De Belin charged

  • Thread starter Thread starter newtiger
  • Start date Start date
"Jack de Belin is innocent until found guilty by a court of law. How difficult is that to understand for some NRL player haters?! He must be allowed to train and play up until the court makes its finding. Ruining a player’s reputation on a mere allegation is simply wrong!"

https://twitter.com/jimmyhooper

"NRL haters" Hooper is a classless mercenary. Forget about the integrity of the NRL. They lack integrity as MEN.
 
Nrl say all good for De Belin ….can play until trial ends ....Pascoe given 12 months before even a hearing .What a joke !
 
Jack De Belin has a partner, Alyce Taylor. There is a photo and article on the net with her and Benji's wife. Always there is the presumption of innocence but really Jack your place is at home with your partner. It has to be better than trawling through a Wollongong night club?
 
Magistrate would have noted her absence at court today too. She's @ home pregnant and your out galavanting with post-pubescent 19 year old girls…Nah man, no way. This guy is the same breed of pig as Hayne.
 
I have no problems with his bail conditions being eased due to his status - as it only implies that he's not a flight risk. In the same token, he should have stood himself down for the sake of his baby mother & the health of his unborn child. Forget club/reputation. Family is paramont.
 
Todd is too busy at the moment to review the WT appeal, he's writing a reference for Jack.
From the news report this sounds very serious.
 
You compare that to for instance Chee-Kam which sounds like nothing. I understand that women now can fake it and the law can be a mess plus he isn't guilty in a court of law until he is actually prosecuted but geez OJ wasn't found guilty and we all know he did it. Guys like that make me sick.
 
This is a tough one. If the allegations are true, he should be locked up for a long time.

If you stand him down, and it finishes up like the Brett Stewart situation, he is being denied his livelihood.

What is really annoying is the absolute lack of any consistency in the entire process.

Would they register a contract for Jarryd Hayne? Has Carney done anything this bad? Where is the Barba's presumption of innocence before Greenberg bans him for life? Where was Wighton's presumption of innocence.

What is the basis for a player to be stood down or banned? From the looks of it, it is not the offence, but the existence of video footage. If you are drunkenly fighting, urinating in your own mouth, simulating sex with a dog, or having sex in your own room and it is captured on camera, expect a ban.

Otherwise you could be Ivan Milat and would still be able to play based on due process & the presumption of innocence until you were found guilty.

All the NRL needs to do is draw up a set of guidelines and then stick to them without playing favourites.
 
If found guilty surely he'd do jail time? His character would surely be shot to pieces, if his defence is that it was consensual whilst his pregnant wife was at home. Sounds like they got forensic evidence, getting the bed sheets, doing a rape kit, so he knows there's no point denying that it happened.

Did I read that correctly, that he went to his cousin's place who he knew wasn't at home?

And pining the lady down by the throat, I'd dead-set be looking at his wife's history for any evidence of assault towards her. That sort of brutal behaviour would not be confined only to occasions of rape, that is the way he is, and I bet his wife knows what he is really like. Sickening.

What's the bet that he does flee the country? Ends up in Asia somewhere in some MH rehab…
 
@Cultured_Bogan said:
If he’s on bail there’s a good chance he’ll surrender his passport.
Click to expand...

He has and that was part of their argument to get the reporting condition dropped - he can't flee if he hasn't got a passport.

@TigerTiger said:
If found guilty surely he’d do jail time?
Click to expand...

Yes if found guilty on those facts he'll do years - at least five years on the bottom.

@Harvey said:
What is the basis for a player to be stood down or banned? From the looks of it, it is not the offence, but the existence of video footage.
Click to expand...

I think it has to be situational to some extent. Where there is CCTV footage they can make their own assessment of the impropriety of the conduct just by relying upon that evidence and they don't need to interfere with the criminal justice system. In the case of an allegation of sexual assault where there is no video footage they would need to get evidence from the complainant and De Belin would be entitled to test that evidence - that is just a basic aspect of natural justice. That process should not happen prior to the criminal justice system determining the issue for a number of reasons: the complainant shouldn't have to give evidence of such a traumatic event more than is absolutely necessary; his defence should not get the opportunity to test lines of cross examination on the complainant at an NRL hearing and then discard those they don't like at a criminal trial; those convening the NRL hearing would likely be less competent than a judge and less able to shut down improper questioning; and he may not want to give evidence at an NRL hearing where it could later be used against him in a criminal trial and forewarn the criminal prosecution team of his defence. So it is a bit of a messy situation for the NRL. They would have to justify standing him down on the basis of the nature and seriousness of the charges alone. They could just introduce a rule along the lines of "any player charged with a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of imprisonment of 14 years or greater must be stood down pending resolution of the charge/s…This rule does not limit the rights of the NRL or the club to summarily terminate a player's contract where sufficient grounds exist."
 
Melbourne Storm owner slams 'morally tone deaf' NRL over De Belin case
By WWOS staff

The owner and chairman of the Melbourne Storm has slammed the NRL for the way its handled the Jack De Belin case, after league executives decided to allow him to play and train with the Dragons while his rape is before the courts.

According to the Daily Telegraph, Bart Campbell sent a scathing email to NRL club bosses attacking the way the league HQ has dealt with the matter.

Campbell has urged his contemporaries to cover the De Belin case and the controversial off-season during the next meeting of club chairs in late February.

The owner of the Storm told the publication it was difficult to stand by and do nothing about the current issues engulfing the game.

“The game’s capacity to hurt itself is wonderful,” he said, “We appear to be morally tone deaf as an organisation. We’re repeatedly making life tough for ourselves.

“I’m saying this as someone from a club that has had its own issues but it’s time for the governing body to act and act quickly.”

Campbell also said he would still support stringent action against one of his own players if they were accused of such a crime.

“What would happen in the real world is someone was dealing with an issue like this (de Belin case).
 
"Nrl say all good for De Belin …can play until trial ends …Pascoe given 12 months before even a hearing .What a joke !"

So disgracefully true. If Pascoe does not win something out of this I am a bad judge.
 
“Campbell also said he would still support stringent action against one of his own players if they were accused of such a crime.”

That’s the problem. How can you take action against anyone based on an accusation alone. If found guilty then absolutely, a very strong stance should be taken. Until then no.
 
@Newtown said:
“Nrl say all good for De Belin …can play until trial ends …Pascoe given 12 months before even a hearing .What a joke !”

So disgracefully true. If Pascoe does not win something out of this I am a bad judge.
Click to expand...

Pascoe cant act in an official role until his appeal is judged on. He hasnt been given 12 months yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 472 (members: 2, guests: 470)
Back
Top