Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roosters fighting crusher charge

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Bruce 38-0 View Post
    Does anyone know what time the hearing is and which journalist normally covers it on his Twitter feed?

    James Hooper usually covers the hearing for Fox League. Sometimes, NRL 360 towards the end of the show provides an update etc. Just stay tuned to social media and the Roosters website.
    Last edited by DP1990; 04-13-2021, 04:08 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      They should make it like Judge Judy
      ..it’ll be interesting to see

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by DP1990 View Post
        I could not see anything whilst watching the replay and even the MINI highlights on Kayo. I think the Roosters know they can fight it at the Judiciary and possibly walk away clear.


        From my personal view:

        1. Insufficient or lack thereof evidence.
        2. No initial notice or sighting from the on-field referee or sideline official(s).
        3. Positioning of the attacking Sharks player (Mawene Hiroti) contributed to the awkwardness of the tackle.
        4. Victor Radley, who was also in the tackle was thought to be the offender, but referee Adam Gee placed Ben Marschke on report. This just proves the lack of clarification on the incident and reprot charge.
        5. Commentary from Fox League commentator Greg Alexander 'Brandy' supports the notion that it was not an obvious crusher tackle - Quote "Crusher ?, he was just leaning in over the top there !"
        maybe other camera angles we can't see?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by King Salvo View Post

          maybe other camera angles we can't see?
          Possibly but I haven't heard or read anything in regards to other camera angles picking up the incident in close/accurate detail. I'm sure a news outlet or a journo would've been all over it by now and made some noise about it. As we all know most of the media and journos would do anything to discredit the Roosters in any way at anytime

          Maybe the MRC has the video evidence ? and they're keeping it quietly to themselves ? but either way the evidence (footage from all angles) will have to be presented at the judiciary as 'burden of proof' and the judiciary officials must prove 'beyond reasonable doubt' that Ben Marschke performed a deliberate 'crusher tackle'

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Jacks Fur Coat View Post
            So they should fight it. No evidence of neck pressure etc. in the style of a 'crusher'.

            Looked like they ended up in a 69 position...not sure if that is illegal though.
            Regarding the legalities....

            I think that is dependent on them both using the consent app....

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by DP1990 View Post

              Possibly but I haven't heard or read anything in regards to other camera angles picking up the incident in close/accurate detail. I'm sure a news outlet or a journo would've been all over it by now and made some noise about it. As we all know most of the media and journos would do anything to discredit the Roosters in any way at anytime

              Maybe the MRC has the video evidence ? and they're keeping it quietly to themselves ? but either way the evidence (footage from all angles) will have to be presented at the judiciary as 'burden of proof' and the judiciary officials must prove 'beyond reasonable doubt' that Ben Marschke performed a deliberate 'crusher tackle'
              I'm pretty sure they don't require that level of proof as is required in a criminal trial. "Balance of probability" as in civil case I suspect.

              Plenty of lawyers on here maybe they can clarify.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by player 1 View Post

                I'm pretty sure they don't require that level of proof as is required in a criminal trial. "Balance of probability" as in civil case I suspect.

                Plenty of lawyers on here maybe they can clarify.
                It's a bit like the French system -Guilty under proven innocent.

                They would go over the video of the incident the player was placed on report and subsequently charged with in disputing the charge plus table player testimonies and other evidence as required i.e precedents and circumstances of the incident etc.

                Not sure of the stats on % of players who plead not guilty that are subsequently found not guilty at the judiciary though - all players who enter a not guilty and or challenge the grading's have legal representation - natural justice ( adequate notice, fair hearing and no bias).

                As I said above not sure if they have other camera angles - the Sharks player got up and held their neck and shook their head which the panel even without conclusive evidence may deem as enough evidence of some sort of force being placed on the players neck - The Balance of probability -more probable than not that it occurred -51 % to 49% .

                Different to beyond reasonable doubt i.e after careful consideration of all the evidence there is only one conclusion the jury and or judge can come to -that the person is guilty of whatever they are charged with or the accused person does not prove they are innocent of the crime they have been charged with.
                Last edited by King Salvo; 04-13-2021, 09:03 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by DP1990 View Post

                  Possibly but I haven't heard or read anything in regards to other camera angles picking up the incident in close/accurate detail. I'm sure a news outlet or a journo would've been all over it by now and made some noise about it. As we all know most of the media and journos would do anything to discredit the Roosters in any way at anytime

                  Maybe the MRC has the video evidence ? and they're keeping it quietly to themselves ? but either way the evidence (footage from all angles) will have to be presented at the judiciary as 'burden of proof' and the judiciary officials must prove 'beyond reasonable doubt' that Ben Marschke performed a deliberate 'crusher tackle'
                  Double Penetratee QC

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    not guilty!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Won appeal...common sense.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Results just came in, he’s free to play this week.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Our great record at the judiciary continues.

                          Questions need to be asked about why the MRC is targeting us so much. Especially with BS crusher charges.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Marshcke just been cleared of a crusher tackle. Cleared to take on the storm.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              one for the good guys

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Excellent news. Hope he gets another crack.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X