Blake Ferguson indecent assault charges.

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
That's all very politically correct Dan but the facts are the Raiders outlined 16 separate incidents in their Dugan dossier to the NRL and 5 of those involved police action.

Have a look at them Dan!I maybe old fashioned Dan but I am a punter and I would have plenty on the fact these blokes are dropkicks of the highest order and their bull**** carry on proves it.

You are dead right about the criminal stuff/sanctions/presumption of innocence etc but I see enough of these dickheads in the junior ranks to be well and truly sick of them and their bull**** attitude and lack of respect. We had a bloke organise a premediated all in brawl in a game via facebook last year which left two volunteer managers hurt.Most of the junior rep kids I deal with are regular attendees at the local cop shop and have zero respect for anyone.

Dugan and Ferguson are simply an extension of the general lack of respect in society these days.Feguson is entitled to a presumption of innocence and should not be suspended until the outcome of the trial but these fools deserve sweet FA otherwise.I certainly wont be shedding a tear for them.
 
susan said:
That's all very politically correct Dan but the facts are the Raiders outlined 16 separate incidents in their Dugan dossier to the NRL and 5 of those involved police action.

Have a look at them Dan!I maybe old fashioned Dan but I am a punter and I would have plenty on the fact these blokes are dropkicks of the highest order and their bull**** carry on proves it.

You are dead right about the criminal stuff/sanctions/presumption of innocence etc but I see enough of these dickheads in the junior ranks to be well and truly sick of them and their bull**** attitude and lack of respect. We had a bloke organise a premediated all in brawl in a game via facebook last year which left two volunteer managers hurt.Most of the junior rep kids I deal with are regular attendees at the local cop shop and have zero respect for anyone.

Dugan and Ferguson are simply an extension of the general lack of respect in society these days.They are entitled to their presumption of innocence but they deserve sweet FA otherwise.

That is all well and good but the Dugan dossier was about Dugan and not the person in question here Ferguson.

From what I have read ferguson comes from a troubled background, possible DOCS involvement etc. However that certainly wouldn't make him immediately guilty here.

Isn't he also homono's nephew
 
Dan

my comments are not about the case in question.Of course he has legal rights that need to be respected and he should not be suspended.

I am simply saying that these fools have zero respect and deserve everything that comes their way.I have no sympathy at all.I see their type every day - its like a production line.

And by the way-they don't change!
 
WESTIE said:
Ralphie..what part of CC footage and witnesses dont you understand ?? If the CC footage shows exactly what is suggested , that is, a sexual assualt , then yes , i am extenduing that to assume he is guilty.

From memory there were no witnesses to the B Sewart debacle.

As mentioned above in my post - " Wouldn't the cops view CC footage from the venue before arresting him , instead of relying on a " he said - she said " scenario ?? Am i to take it you are suggesting the cops arrested him without viewing the footage available to them ??

You are still assuming. Please direct me to the announcement from the Police that they have viewed the CC Footage and it showed him doing something untoward.
 
Ralphie..i really CNBF arguing the point, but here you go..not sure this will even satisfy you , but anyway....

" After being formally charged by police from Miranda, Ferguson was granted conditional bail to appear in Waverley Local Court on July 16 – the day before Origin III.

A police statement said Ferguson had been charged with indecently assaulting a 23-year-old woman at a Cronulla nightclub at about 10.30pm on Sunday.

The woman immediately reported the alleged incident to Cronulla Police and an investigation was initiated, which included detectives from Miranda Local Area Command viewing CCTV vision and speaking to a number of witnesses.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/ferguson-suspended-indefinitely-by-the-nrl-20130617-2oejg.html

So we are to assume they saw nothing untoward , but still decided he need to be charged ??

Opinions are like ar$e holes...everybody's got one.
 
WESTIE said:
Ralphie..i really CNBF arguing the point, but here you go..not sure this will even satisfy you , but anyway....

" After being formally charged by police from Miranda, Ferguson was granted conditional bail to appear in Waverley Local Court on July 16 – the day before Origin III.

A police statement said Ferguson had been charged with indecently assaulting a 23-year-old woman at a Cronulla nightclub at about 10.30pm on Sunday.

The woman immediately reported the alleged incident to Cronulla Police and an investigation was initiated, which included detectives from Miranda Local Area Command viewing CCTV vision and speaking to a number of witnesses.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/ferguson-suspended-indefinitely-by-the-nrl-20130617-2oejg.html

So we are to assume they saw nothing untoward , but still decided he need to be charged ??

Opinions are like ar$e holes...everybody's got one.

I see, you are basing your assumptions on the highly reliable media reports. The same reporters that reported all sorts of interesting things about the Brett Stewart case.

Even the media reports are only saying there was CCTV footage in existence. The Police have made no announcement. You can have your opinion and you are entitled to it. I will leave it to the courts and wait for the FACTS to come out before I criticise him.
 
Ok Ralphie..here you go ..an official cop shop website..now it must be true ??? link provided

Latest Media Releases
Miranda LAC police charge man with indecent assault
Monday, 17 June 2013 07:55:39 PM

Police from Miranda Local Area Command (LAC) have charged a man with indecent assault over an alleged incident at licensed premises in Cronulla yesterday.


Police have been told a 23-year-old ACT man allegedly indecently assaulted a woman, also aged 23, while inside a nightclub on Cronulla Street about 10.30pm yesterday (Sunday 16 June 2013).


The woman immediately reported the incident to Cronulla Police and an investigation was initiated.


Detectives from Miranda Local Area Command viewed CCTV vision and spoke with a number of people.


Shortly before 5pm today (17 June 2013), a 23-year-old man attended Waverley Police Station where he was arrested.


The man has now been charged with one count of indecent assault; he was granted conditional bail to appear in Waverley Local Court on 16 July 2013.

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/news/latest_releases?sq_content_src=%2BdXJsPWh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGd3d3LmViaXoucG9saWNlLm5zdy5nb3YuYXUlMkZtZWRpYSUyRjMwODgxLmh0bWwmYWxsPTE%3D

I wonder where the reporter from the paper got their info from , hmmm ??
 
bones said:
HappilyManly said:
The NRL just needs to suspend Players for 'Bringing the Game into Disrepute'. This has to be tabled in black and white in all the Players' Contracts.

If the allegations are false, how did he bring the game into disrepute? By going out for a drink? The NRL just needs to wait until the court has adjudicated. Simple.

I agree.

Smith's response is the same reflex response to the blackening of the game's image that Gallop produced not that long ago.

If they want to suspend Ferguson - not for being charged by police but for some other alleged repeated breaches - then why hasn't he had the chance to answer that allegation before a penalty is handed down?

The look for rugby league is appalling. However, the solution lies in educating all young players coming through the ranks, to reduce the chance of embarrassing publicity. It is mere window-dressing to instead scapegoat one player who has been charged and is now embroiled in our legal system.

It used to be innocent until proven guilty. Now it is innocent until plays rugby league. Has the so-called 'players association' woken up and commented yet?
 
SeaEagleRock8 said:
bones said:
HappilyManly said:
The NRL just needs to suspend Players for 'Bringing the Game into Disrepute'. This has to be tabled in black and white in all the Players' Contracts.

If the allegations are false, how did he bring the game into disrepute? By going out for a drink? The NRL just needs to wait until the court has adjudicated. Simple.

I agree.

Smith's response is the same reflex response to the blackening of the game's image that Gallop produced not that long ago.

If they want to suspend Ferguson - not for being charged by police but for some other alleged repeated breaches - then why hasn't he had the chance to answer that allegation before a penalty is handed down?

The look for rugby league is appalling. However, the solution lies in educating all young players coming through the ranks, to reduce the chance of embarrassing publicity. It is mere window-dressing to instead scapegoat one player who has been charged and is now embroiled in our legal system.

It used to be innocent until proven guilty. Now it is innocent until plays rugby league. Has the so-called 'players association' woken up and commented yet?

I wish that was the solution, but unfortunately they could not be better educated on these matters than they currently are. The only thing is for players to start losing their careers. There is an old saying I've heard in my work place from time to time. Hang one, teach a 1000.
 
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well
 
Kiwi Eagle said:
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well

Imagine being in Brian Bank's shoes.

http://newsone.com/2597559/brian-banks-wanetta-gibson/

The sad part about his story is that he was actually convicted.
 
Kiwi Eagle said:
niccipops said:
Reading this thread was like watching slow motion tennis.

Saw a few Kournikova v Hingis matches in slow mo ;)
Prefer still shots of Rafa training shirtless.
Wait... off topic. Anyone want to know about pre holocaust sardine storage?
 
Pittwater Legend said:
Kiwi Eagle said:
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well

Imagine being in Brian Bank's shoes.

http://newsone.com/2597559/brian-banks-wanetta-gibson/

The sad part about his story is that he was actually convicted.

Shows how easily it can happen. Disgusting what some people can make up and get away with. Kobe Bryant was on the end of a stitch up years ago but thankfully they got to the truth on that one
 
Kiwi Eagle said:
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well

Stop comparing the Snake case to this one.

The police reviewed footage of the actual incident which occurred at the bar in Ferguson's case.

The police reviewed footage of Snake LEAVING a bar, not of the actual incident or CCTV footage of the area around where it allegedly occured.

Big difference.

Anyway, Dugan and Ferguson are clearly seen wearing NSWRL apparel at the time, at which point the employer has EVERY right to take any disciplinary action it sees fit.
 
Hi KIWI, so you are saying the police viewed the CCTV footage, decide there is nothing in it , but decided to charge Ferguson anyway ?

AND, what footage reg Brett do you believe they , the police ,viewed before charging him ?
Footage from outside the place he lived at where the alleged incident took place or are you referring to footage from a pub he was at waaay before the incident took place?

He was charged by the police for an alleged assault, not for being drunk. The NRL suspended him for being drunk.

BTW -there is a difference between a charge being layed and a conviction.

Kiwi Eagle said:
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well

The point im trying to get across is , yes there should be a presumption of innocence , but in this instance , and with the existence of CCTV footage , i think the cops know which way this is going to go...and have acted accordingly.

Do you think brett stewart would have preffered there to have been video footage of him leaving the taxi when he got home after the launch , and encountered the accuser outside his house ?? would such footage have cleared him straight away and not meant he had to endure hellish accusations ? instead of trying to prove innocence with a " his word against hers" situation ??

for this same reason , i think the CCTV footage the police have viwed would suggest Ferguson has a case to answer. Ferguson will get his chance to argue his case in court.
 
WESTIE said:
Hi KIWI, so you are saying the police viewed the CCTV footage, decide there is nothing in it , but decided to charge Ferguson anyway ?

AND, what footage reg Brett do you believe they , the police ,viewed before charging him ?
Footage from outside the place he lived at where the alleged incident took place or are you referring to footage from a pub he was at waaay before the incident took place?

He was charged by the police for an alleged assault, not for being drunk. The NRL suspended him for being drunk.

BTW -there is a difference between a charge being layed and a conviction.

Kiwi Eagle said:
Westie, all your links say is that the police have viewed CCTV

It does not mention anything at all about what that CCTV shows, or if it was any sort of proof of an incident occuring.

The police also viewed CCTV footage of Brett prior to charging him as well

The point im trying to get across is , yes there should be a presumption of innocence , but in this instance , and with the existence of CCTV footage , i think the cops know which way this is going to go...and have acted accordingly.

Do you think brett stewart would have preffered there to have been video footage of him leaving the taxi when he got home after the launch , and encountered the accuser outside his house ?? would such footage have cleared him straight away and not meant he had to endure hellish accusations ? instead of trying to prove innocence with a " his word against hers" situation ??

for this same reason , i think the CCTV footage the police have viwed would suggest Ferguson has a case to answer. Ferguson will get his chance to argue his case in court.

I'm not saying that there is nothing in it, I can't be sure of that, on the same token you can't be sure that the CCTV footage means there is damning evidence

And I am talking about the pub footage, that police did use to try to use as evidence of his state before the charge

A lot of your viewpoint is adding 1+1 together and coming up with the answer, that may well be true, but we have no idea what the police charge is based

If we go back to Brett again, there was absolutely no evidence at all against him by any means, but the police still went ahead with a charge, partly because of the high profile nature of the case presumably, and that could also be the case on this. It could have been easy in the Brett case to say after both underwent a DNA test they must have had something on him to charge him, but as we all know now they didn't

All my point is really is that nobody should be joining the dots to come to a conclusion that he is guilty until it all unravels through the correct channels
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom