JDB Federal Court Challenge

  • 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.
The Who said:
So, does the NRL give Illawarra an extra $239,000 in actual cash, or do they just allow Illawarra to exceed the salary cap by this amount?
In other words, does Illawarra have to pay this salary from their own pocket, bearing in mind that they are also paying de Bellin's salary?
Click to expand...
Out of pocket but no Cap penalty @:cool:

Drags don't have cash laying around, much like Manly :cool:

With Graham now out for at least 6 weeks with a broken leg and the Origin drain, their Season may already be over :nerd:
 
HappilyManly said:
Out of pocket but no Cap penalty @:cool:

Drags don't have cash laying around, much like Manly :cool:

With Graham now out for at least 6 weeks with a broken leg and the Origin drain, their Season may already be over :nerd:
Click to expand...
I think that's tough on Illawarra.
The NRL imposed this draconian rule so the unfortunate club should not be further disadvantaged.
Naturally if it happened to a wealthy club then finding the extra $239,000 wouldn't be an issue.
 
The Who said:
I think that's tough on Illawarra.
The NRL imposed this draconian rule so the unfortunate club should not be further disadvantaged.
Naturally if it happened to a wealthy club then finding the extra $239,000 wouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...
Plus it's still not been explained what happens to the headcount if JDB's case is dropped this Season.
Do the Drags have 31 players or will they have to flick the 'stand down' recruit :think:
 
MuzztheEagle said:
Not much detail on exactly what the two additional "rape" charges are. Indecent Assault and Sexual Assault?
Would this be common practice in these cases or the police wanting to ensure a conviction in case the aggravated charge doesn't stick?
@Sue or @Bearfax could probably offer some insight.
Click to expand...

Difficult to know. Maybe new evidence like his co accused turning on him re the events in question. From the evidence presented at the magistrates court at the initial hearing there were a number of sexual encounters involved over the evening.Cases like this where there are multiple defendants can get very ugly if one bloke thinks he is getting the blame for something the other bloke did.But it’s all just guessing. Could be other physical evidence has emerged.Who knows.

On another note for those who keep suggesting this is the greatest travesty of justice ever perpetrated. It’s getting pretty silly.Simple question.

Is there a single industry where an extremely highly paid high profile employee would not be stood down when faced with extremely serious criminal charges that could result in a jail term in excess of 10 years.?

The simple answer is NO. The absolute very best a person in his situation could expect in a workplace is stood down on full pay- which is EXACTLY what has happened.

Not sure why being a footballer makes him any different from any high profile person or indeed any person in any industry. Can you imagine a highly paid executive strolling around the office with three rape and assault charges hanging over his head. Im sure female employees would be overjoyed with that state of affairs. Great recipe for company morale. Look it just doesn’t happen. They get stood down or sacked. Simple as that.

So if JDB is a victim of an incredible miscarriage of justice then so has every person who has ever been in his position, and there have been plenty.The banking Royal Commission and the investigation into the illegal fixing of the BBSW rate and exchange rates are classic example and those alleged crimes are not in the same league as this.

I think the universal hatred of Greenberg is clouding the fact that this is exactly what would happen in any other industry in this country when the alleged crimes are of this magnitude.Not saying it’s right or wrong. Simply saying this is what actually happens and this point seems to be missed when discussing JDBs plight.

Toddy’s discretion for more minor offences is a very different issue but in this case this is STANDARD industry practice and in reality being on full pay is the very best he, or any other employee , could have possibly hoped for when faced with allegations of serious sex crimes.
Regardless of opinions on this rule in general I can assure people that this is what happens in cases like this and rightly or wrongly, this is how other employees in similar situations are treated; in fact many fare far far worse than full pay pending the trial.
 
Last edited:
MuzztheEagle said:
Not much detail on exactly what the two additional "rape" charges are. Indecent Assault and Sexual Assault?
Would this be common practice in these cases or the police wanting to ensure a conviction in case the aggravated charge doesn't stick?
@Sue or @Bearfax could probably offer some insight.
Click to expand...


Interestingly from The Canberra Times:

"Prosecutors told the court the four charges - three against de Belin and one against Sinclair - had now been formally certified by the Director of Public Prosecutions."

Only Be Belin has been hit with the 2 extra charges, not his cohort.
 
Sue said:
Difficult to know. Maybe new evidence like his co accused turning on him re the events in question. From the evidence presented at the magistrates court at the initial hearing there were a number of sexual encounters involved over the evening.Cases like this where there are multiple defendants can get very ugly if one bloke thinks he is getting the blame for something the other bloke did.But it’s all just guessing. Could be other physical evidence has emerged.Who knows.

On another note for those who keep suggesting this is the greatest travesty of justice ever perpetrated. It’s getting pretty silly.Simple question.

Is there a single industry where an extremely highly paid high profile employee would not be stood down when faced with extremely serious criminal charges that could result in a jail term in excess of 10 years.?

The simple answer is NO. The absolute very best a person in his situation could expect in a workplace is stood down on full pay- which is EXACTLY what has happened.

Not sure why being a footballer makes him any different from any high profile person or indeed any person in any industry. Can you imagine a highly paid executive strolling around the office with three rape and assault charges hanging over his head. Im sure female employees would be overjoyed with that state of affairs. Great recipe for company morale. Look it just doesn’t happen. They get stood down or sacked. Simple as that.

So if JDB is a victim of an incredible miscarriage of justice then so has every person who has ever been in his position, and there have been plenty.The banking Royal Commission and the investigation into the illegal fixing of the BBSW rate and exchange rates are classic example and those alleged crimes are not in the same league as this.

I think the universal hatred of Greenberg is clouding the fact that this is exactly what would happen in any other industry in this country when the alleged crimes are of this magnitude.Not saying it’s right or wrong. Simply saying this is what actually happens and this point seems to be missed when discussing JDBs plight.

Toddy’s discretion for more minor offences is a very different issue but in this case this is STANDARD industry practice and in reality being on full pay is the very best he, or any other employee , could have possibly hoped for when faced with allegations of serious sex crimes.
Regardless of opinions on this rule in general I can assure people that this is what happens in cases like this and rightly or wrongly, this is how other employees in similar situations are treated; in fact many fare far far worse than full pay pending the trial.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying @Sue but I think the policy is the wrong one for the NRL because:
1. It will encourage crazy people to make fraudulent/trumped up claims - as we call know this has happened before. We now have a situation where a person could be blackmailed with their career on the line.
2. I'm not so sure it will stop the incidents and bad headlines. Players will still go out and get on the booze and drugs and **** will still happen.
 
HappilyManly said:
Plus it's still not been explained what happens to the headcount if JDB's case is dropped this Season.
Do the Drags have 31 players or will they have to flick the 'stand down' recruit :think:
Click to expand...

And if guilty , does the dough get taken back off their cap for the time after
 
Go manly said:
And if guilty , does the dough get taken back off their cap for the time after
Click to expand...
If guilty, JDB's contract is null and void and his replacement is put under the Cap.

The grey area is the time between the new guy starting and JDB's case ending within JDB's contract expiry date

:drunk:
 
Starting to look like a case of where there is smoke, there is fire. Horrible way to flush a career and life down the dunny.
 
Hi Woodsie hope you are well. A no win no fee may be taken on by some firms, however, it is not the norm when it comes to appeals. In saying that nothing is impossible and everything is up for negotiation. One thing is for sure, if it is taken on that basis they would be quietly confident of;
a) Decent prospect of success
b) Decent prospect of compensation

There could also be secret assistance from maybe..... St George themselves, or another interested party to assist financially, should Jack not have the financial resources.

One important thing to note is that there is a new legal team which is imperative in Jack having any success. Firstly, an appeal on a question of law is a specialist area where a question of law cannot be dressed up on the merits of the case. Many times these are the biggest hurdles appeals on a question of law have, and many have the appeal dismissed, as the justices are unable to do anything else but look at any errors made by the previous trial judge and specific narrow grounds of appeal.

Secondly, having the opportunity of looking very quickly at Perry J in her first judgement it was evident that Jack's QC left a lot to be desired. Every practitioner runs a case on what they feel will obtain the best result for a client. In saying that, I am still trying to grapple with the fact that they were claiming compensation for Jack and did not show how the NRL's decision affected him, and to show figures regarding losses of current and future earnings/losses.

It is for his QC to show that there is no break in causation from the decision of NRL to stand him down to how the loss came about. For any compo claim if there are no damages/loss what is the claim about? These are steps you learn at law school and mistakes you may make in the first year of practice, but a QC to not press those issues is strange and it is not for the trial judge to press those issues for him.

So, the best thing Jack could have done is get a new legal team in hope of any success.
 
Last edited:
urulion said:
Hi Woodsie hope you are well. A no win no fee may be taken on by some firms, however, it is not the norm when it comes to appeals. In saying that nothing is impossible and everything is up for negotiation. One thing is for sure, if it is taken on that basis they would be quietly confident of;
a) Decent prospect of success
b) Decent prospect of compensation

There could also be secret assistance from maybe..... St George themselves, or another interested party to assist financially, should Jack not have the financial resources.

One important thing to note is that there is a new legal team which is imperative in Jack having any success. Firstly, an appeal on the question of law is a specialist area where a question of law cannot be dressed up on the merits of the case. Many times these are the biggest hurdles appeals on the question of law have, and many have the appeal dismissed, as the justices are unable to do anything else but look at any errors made by the previous trial judge and specific narrow grounds of appeal.

Secondly, having the opportunity of looking very quickly at Perry J in her first judgement it was evident that Jack's QC left a lot to be desired. Every practitioner runs a case on what they feel will obtain the best result for a client. In saying that, I am still trying to grapple with the fact that they were claiming compensation for Jack and did not show how the NRL's decision affected him, and to show figures regarding losses of current and future earnings/losses.

It is for his QC to show that there is no break in causation from the decision of NRL to stand him down to how the loss came about. For any compo claim if there are no damages/loss what is the claim about? These are steps you learn at law school and mistakes you may make in the first year of practice, but a QC to not press those issues is strange and it is not for the trial judge to press those issues for him.

So, the best thing Jack could have done is get a new legal team in hope of any success.
Click to expand...

I have dealt with my share of QC's and SC's over the years. They are like Silvertails posters; some good some bad.
Everyone of them wants the wig, poor SC's especially, but they are just puppets of their fees and of whatever master they serve - wife/husband/landlord.

In the end they are ruled on and walk away - never poorer for the experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 761 (members: 25, guests: 736)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
7 6 1 99 14
7 6 1 54 14
7 5 2 36 12
8 5 2 39 11
8 5 3 64 10
7 4 3 49 10
8 4 4 73 8
7 3 4 17 8
8 4 4 -14 8
8 4 4 -16 8
8 4 4 -60 8
8 3 4 17 7
8 3 5 -25 6
7 2 5 -55 6
8 3 5 -55 6
7 1 6 -87 4
7 1 6 -136 4

Online statistics

Members online
25
Guests online
736
Total visitors
761
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom