Tamou in Trouble

[MissKate]

Don't think the NRL had anything to do with that, from memory it was a club decision

If the club hadn't suspended them the nrl would have done and given us double demerit treatment also. The warriors should have done the same with packer.

re tamou, it is a legal matter, the cops should throw the book at him, however not sure if his club should have to, it would look better on them if they did stand him down for a week though

 

[globaleagle]

NSW prop James Tamou will be sidelined for game two of the State of Origin series as a result of a two-match suspension after being charged with driving nearly four times over the legal alcohol limit and without a licence.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/tamou-to-miss-origin-ii-after-drinkdrive-charge-20130612-2o3p5.html#ixzz2VyQCIwLd

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

In NSW the Court of Criminal Appeal has given a guideline judgment about High Range PCA offences, which sets out how courts should sentence offenders, and how much weight should be given to various factors, such as prior good character.

http://www.agd.nsw.gov.au/scjudgments/2004nswcca.nsf/80b11454cca062e5ca2569df00268cce/a3fc97ac7034051cca256f010008627a?OpenDocument

Of course, one of the judges that made this decision was himself later convicted of drink driving...

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/former-judge-roderick-howie-convicted-of-drink-driving/story-e6frfku0-1226142655821

 

[Rex]

I don't understand the comments from people in this thread saying we shouldn't judge until he is proven guilty..............ummmm, he has blown 0.197, almost 4 times the legal limit. This isn't in dispute. He clearly is guilty, what else can he plead?

What's so difficult to understand? It's called a presumption of innocence until proven guilty, or admitted guilty.

If you believed News Ltd, you would have believed that Brett was so drunk he couldn't remember anything, that his penis was out of his pants, that people had to pull him off the girl, etc, etc. To a person of intelligence, all these reportings reflected on the credibility of the source - not on the credibility of Brett.

If Tamou admits guilt, which he apparently has, then a strong penalty is warranted. If he didn't, he would have been entitled to argue his case. The exact same right Brett should have been afforded by Gallop - but wasn't. Even Pistorius is entitled to argue his case where key facts are in dispute, and he admits pulling the trigger.

 

[manlyfan76]

Well it is north Queensland so he may get off yet.

 

[Fluffy]

He is Gorne, miss Origin 2 and 30K fine.

Picked the wrong state (cronk can spear like Fa'aoso and get nothing)

 

[mmmdl]

I don't understand the comments from people in this thread saying we shouldn't judge until he is proven guilty..............ummmm, he has blown 0.197, almost 4 times the legal limit. This isn't in dispute. He clearly is guilty, what else can he plead?

What's so difficult to understand? It's called a presumption of innocence until proven guilty, or admitted guilty.

If you believed News Ltd, you would have believed that Brett was so drunk he couldn't remember anything, that his penis was out of his pants, that people had to pull him off the girl, etc, etc. To a person of intelligence, all these reportings reflected on the credibility of the source - not on the credibility of Brett.

If Tamou admits guilt, which he apparently has, then a strong penalty is warranted. If he didn't, he would have been entitled to argue his case. The exact same right Brett should have been afforded by Gallop - but wasn't. Even Pistorius is entitled to argue his case where key facts are in dispute, and he admits pulling the trigger.

there is a huge difference - it's like comparing apples and daisies - that's how different it is.

there was/is no question that the person involved blew 0.197. This is fact. The ONLY question is whether in fact it was Tamou - which has also been admitted to.

there is ZERO way to argue this - it's not an accusation like Brett, or even Pistorius. Unless you are trying to say there is some kind of justification for Tamou driving when that far over the limit. He did it - end of story.

 

[globaleagle]

Whole thing is a beat up!

NSW win game 1 so a nsw player, playing for a QLD based team is pressured into admitting to a stand-downable offence.

Why? Glad you asked.

This will make it easier for qld to win game 2.

If Qld then win game 2, the general vibe of the footy playing public goes back to warm and fuzzy which equals bums on seats.

With NQ having a terrible year, they need the all the money from gate sales they can 'muster.' (muster....see what I did there?!?...genius)

So Tamou has become the fall guy for poor NQ performances and this is the lengths the qld rl will go to, to maintain money in their state.

Shame qld shame for threatening a guys contract!

Go Manly!