NATION

PASSWORD

The Trail of De Belin and Sinclair (EDIT: Police Officer Lie

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

The Trail of De Belin and Sinclair (EDIT: Police Officer Lie

Postby Australian rePublic » Mon May 10, 2021 1:57 am

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-10/ ... /100111886
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/jac ... 57nm6.html
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/subsc ... de=premium

So in 2018, NRL player (NRL-or Rugby League being a prestigious, world-class sport). In 2918, NRL Player Jack De Belin and his friend Callan Sinclair were accused of raping a then 19 year old woman Both men pleaded not-guilty and insisted that the sexual threesome was consensual. Today, finally, after years, the second jury found De Belin and Sinclair not guilty of one of the 6 charges, and it was the second hung jury, meaning that they were found neither innocent nor guilty. The DPP (Department of Public Prosecutions) will rule about whether or not there will be a third jury. Normally, an individual court case wouldn't warrant its own thread, however given how high profile De Belin is, one of Australia's elite sportsmen, I'm not sure if it would be worth a thread, however, the real nuanced part of this is the NRL's no-fault stand-down. I'll get into what that is in a moment, but first, for the record, I must state that the alleged victim's father was a police officer, and one of the police officers at his station admitted to lying to the court. I won't comment too much on the case, as it's still potentially a matter for the courts, however, what I really want to discuss is the no-fault stand-down

Pretty much as soon as De Belin was accused of such crimes, the National Rugby League (NRL) introduced a new "no fault stand down rule, meaning that any player who is accused of any serious crime will automatically be stood down until they are found innocent in a court of law. At the time, many suspected was created specifically to apply to De Belin, especially considering how around the same Matt Lodge was found guilty of bashing the shit out of a family in the USA, and he was still allowed to play, even to this day (https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/infuri ... 4z2fh.html), and many people continue to criticise the rule of the no fault stand down, and many people, to this day, continue to believe that it is selectively applied by the NRL.

It should also be noted that a couple of weeks ago, NRL player Jarryd Hayne was found guilty of rape, and some of his supporters showed up to the court case and spat on his victim, but this way, way, way after the original De Belin accusations

Right now, the NRL is crisis control mode and not sure whether or not to reinstate De Belin if there is no third trial, and also worried about whether or not they will get seud by De Belin for loss of income. If there is no third trial, I don't legal ground the NRL will use for not allowing him to play, besides "Well technically, he wasn't found not guilty", and I bloody hope that doesn't hold any water, because, in the eyes of the law, he's not guilty. And if they don't allow him to play with a hung jury and no third trial, I hope he sues the shit out of them. THat's just disgusting. However, even if he is allowed to play if the DPP decides not to host a third trial, then the NRL is still liable to get sued from De Belin because of the income he lost during this period. I was against the no stand down rule as soon as it was introduced (I am also aware that other employers do that, and I am against them doing that too) as I believe that everyone is innocent till proven guilty. I especially hate the double standards that apply to De Belin and Matt Lodge. De Belin wasn't found guilty but Lodge was, and not only that, but he also failed to pay court-ordered reparations. Anyways, as this is one of the hottest stories in the state of New South Wales right now, what's your take on the matter NSG?
Last edited by Australian rePublic on Fri Jun 04, 2021 2:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Toronina
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6647
Founded: Oct 06, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Toronina » Mon May 10, 2021 2:04 am

Players accused of crimes should be stood down. It will never be a good look and only lead to more controversy should someone be allowed to keep playing, only to be found guilty.
Now I'm back in the ring to take another swing

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Mon May 10, 2021 2:06 am

Toronina wrote:Players accused of crimes should be stood down. It will never be a good look and only lead to more controversy should someone be allowed to keep playing, only to be found guilty.

So what about Matt Lodge, who was not only found guilty, but failed to pay court-ordered reparations. Either case, I disagree, innocent till proven guilty, especially in the case of the NRL where it's selectively enforced. And what do you make of them potentially not allowing him to play despite a hung jury?
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Toronina
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6647
Founded: Oct 06, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Toronina » Mon May 10, 2021 2:14 am

Australian rePublic wrote:
Toronina wrote:Players accused of crimes should be stood down. It will never be a good look and only lead to more controversy should someone be allowed to keep playing, only to be found guilty.

So what about Matt Lodge, who was not only found guilty, but failed to pay court-ordered reparations. Either case, I disagree, innocent till proven guilty, especially in the case of the NRL where it's selectively enforced. And what do you make of them potentially not allowing him to play despite a hung jury?


Lodge should have been stood down as well, and the NRL shouldn't be hypocrites on the issue. It seems to me however that as a private corporation, they've taken action based on the amount of media attention both gathered. I don't think that's a moral thing to do, and I think the rights of corporations should be heavily restricted. Based on your signiture and post, I would have assumed you were the type of person to generally support corporations and their ability to do as they please.
Now I'm back in the ring to take another swing

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Mon May 10, 2021 2:21 am

Toronina wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:So what about Matt Lodge, who was not only found guilty, but failed to pay court-ordered reparations. Either case, I disagree, innocent till proven guilty, especially in the case of the NRL where it's selectively enforced. And what do you make of them potentially not allowing him to play despite a hung jury?


Lodge should have been stood down as well, and the NRL shouldn't be hypocrites on the issue. It seems to me however that as a private corporation, they've taken action based on the amount of media attention both gathered. I don't think that's a moral thing to do, and I think the rights of corporations should be heavily restricted. Based on your signiture and post, I would have assumed you were the type of person to generally support corporations and their ability to do as they please.

I do agree that corporations should be allowed to do whatever they like, to a certain degree. However, when it involves such matters, I believe that I have the right to an opinion on their actions, and I definately do not like double standards. Also, just because a corporation should be allowed to do whatever they want, doesn't mean that that shouldn't be trumped "innocent till proven guilty". My belief that corporations can do whatever they want is not unconditional, just as I wouldn't think that "corporations can do whatever they want" wouldn't be an acceptable excuse for corporations using Uyghur slave labour
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
The Two Jerseys
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16329
Founded: Jun 07, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Two Jerseys » Mon May 10, 2021 9:01 pm

As far as I'm concerned he should still be allowed to play up until the moment he's convicted. I can't stand how leagues will suspend players accused of committing crimes because "so-and-so's conduct doesn't reflect the values and standards of the League", even though it hasn't been proven that he actually did anything that violates the League's values and standards.

Now as for this third trial, if the prosecution doesn't proceed with another trial I don't see how the League can't reinstate him, by their own words the suspension applies to "players accused of committing serious crimes", but if charges are dropped then technically he's not accused of committing a serious crime.
"The Duke of Texas" is too formal for regular use. Just call me "Your Grace".
"If I would like to watch goodness, sanity, God and logic being fucked I would watch Japanese porn." -Nightkill the Emperor
"This thread makes me wish I was a moron so that I wouldn't have to comprehend how stupid the topic is." -The Empire of Pretantia
Head of State: HM King Louis
Head of Government: The Rt. Hon. James O'Dell MP, Prime Minister
Ambassador to the World Assembly: HE Sir John Ross "J.R." Ewing II, Bt.
Join Excalibur Squadron. We're Commandos who fly Spitfires. Chicks dig Commandos who fly Spitfires.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 pm

The Two Jerseys wrote:As far as I'm concerned he should still be allowed to play up until the moment he's convicted. I can't stand how leagues will suspend players accused of committing crimes because "so-and-so's conduct doesn't reflect the values and standards of the League", even though it hasn't been proven that he actually did anything that violates the League's values and standards.

Now as for this third trial, if the prosecution doesn't proceed with another trial I don't see how the League can't reinstate him, by their own words the suspension applies to "players accused of committing serious crimes", but if charges are dropped then technically he's not accused of committing a serious crime.

Well, they seem to make the rules as they go. But apparently, if there is no third trial, he will be reinstated
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

UPDATE POST

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jun 04, 2021 2:51 am

POST UPDATE

https://thewest.com.au/news/crime/witne ... 689320.amp

So here's an update on the situation. Both men were aquited due to two hung juries and they didn't bother for a third trial and he is playing again

HOWEVER
A police officer admited to lying to the court about the matter and will be repremanded internally. Repremanded internally? What the hell does that even mean? How do we even know he will get punished for lying? I mean, he might, but how do we know he will? I guess now this can become a thread about police accountability
Last edited by Australian rePublic on Fri Jun 04, 2021 3:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 53600
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
New York Times Democracy

Postby Risottia » Fri Jun 04, 2021 3:05 am

Toronina wrote:Players accused of crimes should be stood down.

I accuse you of *choose a crime*.
Hereby you are being suspended without pay from your job and from your academic career and from any official position you might be holding.

Happy?
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.
SUMMER, BLOODY SUMMER!

User avatar
Devkurt Oiljoks
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: May 23, 2021
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Devkurt Oiljoks » Fri Jun 04, 2021 3:25 am

Tuvalu Princesses wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:A police officer admited to lying to the court about the matter and will be repremanded internally. Repremanded internally? What the hell does that even mean? How do we even know he will get punished for lying? I mean, he might, but how do we know he will? I guess now this can become a thread about police accountability


Um, did the court find that he lied? And if so, shouldn't he be charged with perjury?

"Admitting to lying" is not itself an offense, unless it's done under oath.


All police officers take an oath of office (or however it is called in Australia) so any lying to the court in his capacity as an officer is automatically a perjury - by virtue of that oath of office.

And as for when a player should be stood down:
why not set as a rule that unless that police holds someone in custody pending charges, he or she can continue in their jobs? That's what the rest of the world does: unless you are under arrest, you will be expected to turn up for your job...

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jun 04, 2021 3:33 am

Tuvalu Princesses wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:POST UPDATE

https://thewest.com.au/news/crime/witne ... 689320.amp

So here's an update on the situation. Both men were aquited due to two hung juries and they didn't bother for a third trial and he is playing again

HOWEVER
A police officer admited to lying to the court about the matter and will be repremanded internally. Repremanded internally? What the hell does that even mean? How do we even know he will get punished for lying? I mean, he might, but how do we know he will? I guess now this can become a thread about police accountability


Um, did the court find that he lied? And if so, shouldn't he be charged with perjury?

"Admitting to lying" is not itself an offense, unless it's done under oath.

Yes, he was under oath. A police officer lied under oath to a court about server criminal matter which could have potentially lead to a person spending a significant amount of time in jail because of the lie. How should that not a punishable offence? If that isn't a punishable offence, there is something very wrong with our justice system. It doesn't help that the woman's father is himself a police officer who worked in the same command as the lyimg cop
Last edited by Australian rePublic on Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:03 am, edited 4 times in total.
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Page
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14232
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Page » Fri Jun 04, 2021 3:44 am

Australian rePublic wrote:POST UPDATE

https://thewest.com.au/news/crime/witne ... 689320.amp

So here's an update on the situation. Both men were aquited due to two hung juries and they didn't bother for a third trial and he is playing again

HOWEVER
A police officer admited to lying to the court about the matter and will be repremanded internally. Repremanded internally? What the hell does that even mean? How do we even know he will get punished for lying? I mean, he might, but how do we know he will? I guess now this can become a thread about police accountability


"Reprimanded internally" is police code for "lol got away with it again."
I don't believe in kink-shaming unless your kink is submitting to the state.

"If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged." - Noam Chomsky

FREE BORDERLANDS OF ROJAVA (also still haven't forgiven Liriena being DEATed, stop DEATing cool people)

Protect yourself from Covid-19: Stop licking boots.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:03 am

Page wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:POST UPDATE

https://thewest.com.au/news/crime/witne ... 689320.amp

So here's an update on the situation. Both men were aquited due to two hung juries and they didn't bother for a third trial and he is playing again

HOWEVER
A police officer admited to lying to the court about the matter and will be repremanded internally. Repremanded internally? What the hell does that even mean? How do we even know he will get punished for lying? I mean, he might, but how do we know he will? I guess now this can become a thread about police accountability


"Reprimanded internally" is police code for "lol got away with it again."

A lot of people tend to think that
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:36 am

Tuvalu Princesses wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Yes, he was under oath. A police officer lied under oath to a court about server criminal matter which could have potentially lead to a person spending a significant amount of time in jail because of the lie. How should that not a punishable offence? If that isn't a punishable offence, there is something very wrong with our justice system.


Hence why I asked. Did the court find that he lied? Or is that just, like, your opinion?

Dude, he admitted he lied under oath. That's not my opinion
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Gravlen
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14860
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Gravlen » Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:00 am

Australian rePublic wrote:
Tuvalu Princesses wrote:
Hence why I asked. Did the court find that he lied? Or is that just, like, your opinion?

Dude, he admitted he lied under oath. That's not my opinion

To support you here, I'll point out that the article says this:
Judge Nicole Norman told the jury that the detective received a certificate preventing prosecution after admitting he lied in the first trial of the two men which could not be concluded.


I have a difficult time getting a handle on what, exactly, he lied about though. Do you have any more information about this than the article you provided says? It could possibly explain why it's not seen as a punishable offence, so I'm curious...
EnragedMaldivians wrote:That's preposterous. Gravlens's not a white nationalist; Gravlen's a penguin.

Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj wrote:There is no use arguing the definition of murder with someone who has a picture of a penguin with a chainsaw as their nations flag.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22113
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:03 am

Gravlen wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Dude, he admitted he lied under oath. That's not my opinion

To support you here, I'll point out that the article says this:
Judge Nicole Norman told the jury that the detective received a certificate preventing prosecution after admitting he lied in the first trial of the two men which could not be concluded.


I have a difficult time getting a handle on what, exactly, he lied about though. Do you have any more information about this than the article you provided says? It could possibly explain why it's not seen as a punishable offence, so I'm curious...

I don't know the exact details, but it had something to do with misleading evidence. Read more here:.

https://amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw/det ... 56fne.html
Last edited by Australian rePublic on Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Check Out My Blog: https://sgb1995.wixsite.com/mysite-6
It's funny how the strongest advocates for conscription have themselves never served
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government
I never said she stole all my money
This sentence can be read 8 different ways, depending on which word is emphasised
I turned the alarm off when it went off
The car had to go because it didn't go

User avatar
Gravlen
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14860
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Gravlen » Fri Jun 04, 2021 6:53 am

Australian rePublic wrote:
Gravlen wrote:To support you here, I'll point out that the article says this:
Judge Nicole Norman told the jury that the detective received a certificate preventing prosecution after admitting he lied in the first trial of the two men which could not be concluded.


I have a difficult time getting a handle on what, exactly, he lied about though. Do you have any more information about this than the article you provided says? It could possibly explain why it's not seen as a punishable offence, so I'm curious...

I don't know the exact details, but it had something to do with misleading evidence. Read more here:.

https://amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw/det ... 56fne.html

Thanks.

If I understand this correctly, he was lying about whether he knew that some messages on de Belin's phone were between de Belin and his lawyer. That's absolutely not something you should do, but it's hard to see how it would matter in this case, so it could easily not reach a level of criminality which would be prosecuted.

However, his biggest sin wasn't lying, in my opinion, but rather his failure to disclose inconsistencies in the woman's narrative before the trial. That's something which should be unacceptable for a senior detective. He probably can't be prosecuted for it, but it should lead to serious consequences for his career.
EnragedMaldivians wrote:That's preposterous. Gravlens's not a white nationalist; Gravlen's a penguin.

Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj wrote:There is no use arguing the definition of murder with someone who has a picture of a penguin with a chainsaw as their nations flag.


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ayytaly, British West Zuzunia, Conservative Republic Of Huang, Kilobugya

Advertisement

Remove ads