Zane Musgrove

[Tim Sheens]

Whilst we have been discussing the indiscretion allegedly committed by Zane, with some seemingly more concerned about it's affect on WT, statistically, another woman has been killed and most likely by a man she loves. It is wrong that so many woman are attacked, just like past (plus present) predation on gay or transgender persons and it must stop.

 

[innsaneink]

Remember Brett Stewart?

 

[Doc_Tiger]

Remember Brett Stewart?

Copped it from all and sundry before being acquitted - yep. Also intentionally knocked a ball over our fullbacks head to go on and score and it was awarded - typical.

 

[Nelson]

Sorry but we are not his family or one of his mates, we support his employer. Who by the way he has disgraced with these alleged charges.

I would suggest looking up the description of an aggravated indecent assault. Have a real good look at what that charge actually means.

When something like this happens people will always be divided.

Some that know for a fact this man has had a history of this kind of behaviour and want it stopped, and don’t put club or winning games ahead of people’s well being.

And some that are not affected and solely think about what this does to our team.

Friends and family are who he should turn to now, not an employer!
This happens everyday, how many employees would be leaning on their boss for support? Especially the first month in.
His family needs to help him help himself.

Before musgrove signed the club was/is in a really good place, Madge and Pascoe need to decide which side of the fence their on.

Aggravated indecent assault is a related but more serious crime. In aggravated indecent assault, an offender penetrates the anus or genitals of another person without their consent. The offender uses force or threat of force. There was no medical, hygiene or law enforcement reason for the penetration.

Not directing it at yourself but people need to have a good look at what this charge is.

I am pretty sure "aggravated" can be added to any charge if there is a second person present at the time of the crime. I. E. 2 people break into a house it becomes aggravated break and enter.

It can't be added to any charge, there are just certain charges that have aggravated forms and "in company" is commonly included as a circumstance of aggravation. Indecent assault, sexual assault, break and enter, detain for advantage all have an aggravated form that includes "in company" as a circumstance of aggravation. There is also a specific charge of robbery in company with a higher maximum than robbery (20y v 14y) and assault occasioning actual bodily harm is the same (7y max v 5y max). There are others as well but not all charges have it. Common assault doesn't and neither does fraud, murder, drug supply etc.

Aggravated indecent assault definitely does **not** include acts of penetration. Those are charged as sexual assault and have been since the early 1980's when the definition of "sexual intercourse" was expanded.

 

[magpiecol]

If he is guilty the NRL should make a stand. It’s no good us tearing up his contract only for a Manly or a Parramatta to sign him. If he’s guilty he needs to be stood down - not from a club but from playing footy.

Oh - and he should go to gaol

How about a public execution?

That would be awesome.

 

[Cairnstigers]

I don’t see why it matters whether the contract is registered or not. If he’s found guilty, we have grounds to tear the contract up.

Because if he is still registered with souths they may be forced to release someone else if he is still contracted

 

[prattenparkchild]

If he is guilty the NRL should make a stand. It’s no good us tearing up his contract only for a Manly or a Parramatta to sign him. If he’s guilty he needs to be stood down - not from a club but from playing footy.

Oh - and he should go to gaol

Don't agree with last bit about gaol but I agree the NRL has to support sanctions against players by a club. No good a club tearing up a contract just for another club to make an opportunistic contract place instead. I know we can't stop them going to esl but at least they have to get past immigration visa character tests. We can and should support sanctions here within the NRL. I also know not all situations would require this ultimate sanction.

 

[Geo]

**What's the relevance of the bold red text?**

Four out of how many?
16x30=?
Yes, four is four too many… But this isn't just a RL issue... It's a social issue

Article states the Musgrove was charged days later after the Walker incident but his incident occurred last Month..his signing was announced on the 22nd of November..just wondering if it occurred prior to that date or after…between the 22nd and the 30th of November or in October ..was some conjecture..

From the damage to women thread states that Musgrove was charged 3 days after the Walker incident after an incident that occurred last month at the Coogee Bay hotel..We announced his signing the on the 22nd…1 week prior to the Walker charge..unless it's totallly wrong the timeframe doesn't add up..which suggests to me it occured prior to his signing with Wests Tigers..

 

[NT_Tiger]

**What's the relevance of the bold red text?**

Four out of how many?
16x30=?
Yes, four is four too many… But this isn't just a RL issue... It's a social issue

Article states the Musgrove was charged days later after the Walker incident but his incident occurred last Month..his signing was announced on the 22nd of November..just wondering if it occurred prior to that date or after…between the 22nd and the 30th of November or in October ..was some conjecture..

From the damage to women thread states that Musgrove was charged 3 days after the Walker incident after an incident that occurred last month at the Coogee Bay hotel..We announced his signing the on the 22nd…1 week prior to the Walker charge..unless it's totallly wrong the timeframe doesn't add up..which suggests to me it occured prior to his signing with Wests Tigers..

Yep, that's how I see it.

 

[Go_You_Good_Things]

Agree, the key is to be the club that can turn them around. The Roosters and what they managed with Zane Tetevano is the perfect example.

Bingo.

We have him. He is on our books and we have signed a contract.

We should discipline him and see if he can change his ways.
There is a difference between **_a pattern of behaviour_** and an incident. Lets give him a chance to reform.

Well only 3 months ago he was convicted of wilful damage when he screamed at his GF and smashed a gate, the judge saying it was on the same level as domostic violence…..so there is that. Seems like a pattern to me.

" How do you she is a witch" ?
_she turned me into a mute_
. . . . . Jokes aside, if he really honestly did smash a gate, then sack him. We want forwards who will bend the line, not bend the gate.
. . . And for such a relevant and on point precedent . . . . the "Brett Stewart" reference sure lacked traction.
So we need to show concern for gates, gays and trans genders. What about the children ?
Won't somebody please think of the children !!!!!

 

[240z]

Ch 9 reports that Dylan Walker pleads not guilty and his fiancé wants to retract her statement to police. Video shows them walking out of court holding hands.

Not sure what to make of this!

 

[Nelson]

Ch 9 reports that Dylan Walker pleads not guilty and his fiancé wants to retract her statement to police. Video shows them walking out of court holding hands.

Not sure what to make of this!

It happens all the time in DV matters. There is a period where victims are initially compliant with police but then forgiveness and/or the realisation of financial dependence or any one of a hundred other things enter the frame and they become reluctant or hostile witnesses. It has been such a problem over the years that legislation was introduced whereby the evidence of victims of domestic violence can be recorded shortly after the event and can be played in court (a DVEC interview).

Matters can still be prosecuted even with a hostile victim, especially if there are independent witnesses and if the victim has made an initial sworn allegation. The prosecutor just has to cross examine the victim using their initial statement as a prior inconsistent statement in that kind of case.

 

[851]

Ch 9 reports that Dylan Walker pleads not guilty and his fiancé wants to retract her statement to police. Video shows them walking out of court holding hands.

Not sure what to make of this!

Hand in hand and he has a an AVO out against him, he should have been arrested right there and then 😱pen_mouth:

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Ch 9 reports that Dylan Walker pleads not guilty and his fiancé wants to retract her statement to police. Video shows them walking out of court holding hands.

Not sure what to make of this!

It happens all the time in DV matters. There is a period where victims are initially compliant with police but then forgiveness and/or the realisation of financial dependence or any one of a hundred other things enter the frame and they become reluctant or hostile witnesses. It has been such a problem over the years that legislation was introduced whereby the evidence of victims of domestic violence can be recorded shortly after the event and can be played in court (a DVEC interview).

Matters can still be prosecuted even with a hostile victim, especially if there are independent witnesses and if the victim has made an initial sworn allegation. The prosecutor just has to cross examine the victim using their initial statement as a prior inconsistent statement in that kind of case.

Wasn't Walker's assault witnessed by neighbours? They can still use their testimony can't they?

 

[TYGA]

It was over the PS4 Rugby League game she selected Curtis Scott and ran all over him.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

No surprise that she’d defend him, even if he did assault her. That’s how a lot of DV relationships are. It takes a lot for some women to leave.

 

[Nelson]

Ch 9 reports that Dylan Walker pleads not guilty and his fiancé wants to retract her statement to police. Video shows them walking out of court holding hands.

Not sure what to make of this!

It happens all the time in DV matters. There is a period where victims are initially compliant with police but then forgiveness and/or the realisation of financial dependence or any one of a hundred other things enter the frame and they become reluctant or hostile witnesses. It has been such a problem over the years that legislation was introduced whereby the evidence of victims of domestic violence can be recorded shortly after the event and can be played in court (a DVEC interview).

Matters can still be prosecuted even with a hostile victim, especially if there are independent witnesses and if the victim has made an initial sworn allegation. The prosecutor just has to cross examine the victim using their initial statement as a prior inconsistent statement in that kind of case.

Wasn't Walker's assault witnessed by neighbours? They can still use their testimony can't they?

Yeah 100%. Still going to have to deal with her as a witness though. I guess it depends on what they mean by a "retraction statement". That could mean anything from a statement saying she no longer wants the charges to proceed (but not saying that anything she had previously said was untrue) to a statement completely contradicting what she said on the night and attempting to give him self-defence as an out. Just have to wait and see how it plays out.

 

[Red88_Tiger]

It was over the PS4 Rugby League game she selected Curtis Scott and ran all over him.

:roll :roll :roll

 

[tigertye]

It was over the PS4 Rugby League game she selected Curtis Scott and ran all over him.

Did you come up with that one yourself or just post the joke someone else tried to make on Facebook lol.

 

[happy_tiger]

No surprise that she’d defend him, even if he did assault her. That’s how a lot of DV relationships are. It takes a lot for some women to leave.

Have a niece who was / is in a relationship with an ex Vic copper ….........trust me sometimes it is easier for them to stay in the relationship

Truly scary stuff