One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: TigerLand on October 06, 2017, 06:39:03 PM
-
Tried finding a thread on this but couldn't?
Hats off to the girl who clearly was happy to be photographed. Nothing abusive about it. Great rig and great medal. Tasteless maybe but nothing wrong about it. No1 takes a photo of someone like that without consent. Wonderful stuff all round.
If anyone has a copy a mate of mine is keen to see if so feel free to private message me. :scream
-
Here is a link to the story and censored photo.
https://www.nova100.com.au/latest/rude-picture-richmond-premiership-medal-shared-online
-
Nothing wrong with a great rack, it's human nature in its purest
-
Any links for the uncensored pic?
-
Any links for the uncensored pic?
i have it if you want to private message your email.
wp is in a good mood lets not change that.
-
It's easy to find lads, just search Grumpy Dimma on twitter....
https://mobile.twitter.com/grumpydimma
-
what is sexist is covering up the nipple, didn't we address this with the "Free the Nipple" campaign run by feminists on Facebook?
-
I can’t see any premiership medallion.
-
I can’t see any premiership medallion.
Read between the lines.
-
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/138/246/tumblr_lltzgnHi5F1qzib3wo1_400.jpg)
-
Tried finding a thread on this but couldn't?
No thread but I alluded to it in another, once again I was first #ybb
-
Tried finding a thread on this but couldn't?
No thread but I alluded to it in another, once again I was first #ybb
Reckon I had a copy before most :shh
-
Tried finding a thread on this but couldn't?
No thread but I alluded to it in another, once again I was first #ybb
Reckon I had a copy before most :shh
The original would have been better
-
Tried finding a thread on this but couldn't?
No thread but I alluded to it in another, once again I was first #ybb
Reckon I had a copy before most :shh
Doubt it :shh
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
:shh
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
link please or private message
-
I can’t see any premiership medallion.
Read between the lines.
I was being disingenuous.
-
I can’t see any premiership medallion.
Read between the lines.
I was being disingenuous.
I know. :shh
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
like that lady from Total Recall?
PM pleez
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
like that lady from Total Recall?
PM pleez
Yo, shoot one to me too if you don't mind
-
You're not talking about the 3 breasted mutant are you? :lol
-
You're not talking about the 3 breasted mutant are you? :lol
aye ;D
-
Apparently Don Pyke wants this girls phone number.
Reckons she got closer to a Richmond player on grandfinal day than any of his players did.
-
Peggy just got questioned about this on Q&A, which means it will go full mainstream media now.
I wonder if the Herald Sun will do a full wraparound or centre page spread for this story.
-
what would you expect from the ABC?? seriously
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
pm pls
-
It's all over the TV news services tonight.
7 News report: https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/status/917649025175654400
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Richmond Tigers investigating leaked photos of topless woman wearing 2017 premiership medal
By WWOS staff
10 Oct 2017 6:00pm
Richmond president Peggy O'Neal has confirmed the club is investigating leaked photos that emerged following the AFL grand final showing a topless woman wearing a 2017 premiership medal.
In one image the naked woman appears in front of a Richmond club logo with her back to the camera, holding a Sherrin, and in the other the woman is facing the camera, topless and wearing the medal awarded to the 2017 AFL premiers.
It is not known to whom the medal belongs to, or who the woman is, or whether the photos were taken - and released online - with or without her consent.
On ABC's Q&A program on Monday, O'Neal answered a question from the audience about whether Australian football has a "problem with women" referencing the photos which appear to implicate a member of Richmond's team being involved.
"If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women we certainly don't stand for that, that's not what our club is about, and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture then that will be taken into account," O'Neal said.
"I think that our club has shown its for equality, its for inclusiveness and it wants to promote women, so the fact that someone has made a terrible judgment and maybe has been disrespectful, I think that doesn't say what the club is about or what the sport is about.
“I would expect that there’s an investigation going on now.
“I’m just not across the facts. It’s just been brought to my attention very recently within the last few hours but I understand that something’s going on.”
On 3AW, Victorian police chief Graham Ashton said there was no investigation involving the police.
“That sounds like a behavioural issue with one of the players they’d be trying to deal with, I reckon,” Ashton said.
“They probably don’t want their premiership medals on display like that.”
https://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/10/10/16/28/richmond-tigers-investigating-photos-of-topless-woman-after-afl-grand-final
https://www.3aw.com.au/rumour-update-richmond-president-responds-to-photo-of-topless-woman/
-
Not sure how much I can say on this one, but am (indirectly) fairly close to the source :angel: :angel:
It may well blow up. Watch this space.
-
She didn't say the Club was investigating, think you will find the AFL integrity unit is investigating
-
Have the white ribbon hairy armpits thrown their opinion in yet
-
Forgot to add
Driving home tonight (around 6.25) on SEN Ox & Marko said there was 2nd photo taken outside the social club
They both agree that the photos are of the women posing, so therefore not disrespectful or to put it another way the women in the photos aren't being forced to strike a naked pose
-
Forgot to add
Driving home tonight (around 6.25) on SEN Ox & Marko said there was 2nd photo taken outside the social club
They both agree that the photos are lf the women posing, so therefore not disresoectful or to put it another way the women in the photos aren't being forced to strike a naked pose
and how do our women feel about that ?
-
Forgot to add
Driving home tonight (around 6.25) on SEN Ox & Marko said there was 2nd photo taken outside the social club
They both agree that the photos are lf the women posing, so therefore not disresoectful or to put it another way the women in the photos aren't being forced to strike a naked pose
and how do our women feel about that ?
shitted off due to a lack of cohesion
-
This sounds like case for Super Fem Clem....
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/31/03/43BBD24B00000578-4838780-image-a-48_1504148369535.jpg)
(https://imgfast.net/users/3115/50/25/04/smiles/2506532406.gif)
-
Well the cops are involved now as it appears the photo was posted on social media without consent
From the AFL website:
===============
Probe into photo of topless woman with Tiger medal
Dinny Navaratnam
October 10, 2017 8:42 PM
POLICE are investigating the photo of a topless woman with a premiership medal draped around her neck being circulated without her permission.
The photo emerged on social media hours after Richmond won the Grand Final.
"Yarra Crime Investigation Unit detectives are investigating an image distributed on social media," a statement from Victoria Police read.
"The image was posted without consent.
"As the investigation is ongoing it would be inappropriate to comment further."
Richmond had no comment when contacted on Tuesday night.
However, Tigers president Peggy O'Neal told ABC on Monday a punishment could be handed to the player responsible if the investigation found the woman had been wronged.
"If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women, we certainly don't stand for that. That's not what our club's about and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture, then of course it will be taken into account," O'Neal said.
"That isn't what we're about, it isn't what the AFL's about. I think that our club has shown it's for equality, it’s for inclusiveness, and it wants to promote women."
The AFL had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-10/police-probe-photo-of-topless-woman-with-richmond-premiership-medal
It is also being reported on the HUN website that the police are investigating but I can't post that article as it's behind their pesky paywall
-
She's lawyered up.
Cue Rita.
-
Cops a premiership root and now wants in on RFC's financial winnings
-
double post - deleted
-
Forgot to add
Driving home tonight (around 6.25) on SEN Ox & Marko said there was 2nd photo taken outside the social club
They both agree that the photos are of the women posing, so therefore not disrespectful or to put it another way the women in the photos aren't being forced to strike a naked pose
100% guarantee the lady in the 2nd photo outside the Punt Rd Oval is not the same as the lady in the medal
" Bella" does a hump day pic each Wednesday and was showing her support for the Tiges leading up to the GF
Never more nothing less
Hardly newsworthy
-
Can't have a Richmond premiership without some kind of post grand final drama....confected or otherwise...
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
like that lady from Total Recall?
PM pleez
Yo, shoot one to me too if you don't mind
Could you shoot one my way too please :)
-
35 years on from our last GF and we're undone by a some tart flashing her t@s again....
-
hypothetical - what would happen if our future ladies team won a premiership and one of the women players got her boyfriend to pose at Punt Rd Oval with the medal around his wang?
would the guy be charged for indecent exposure? would the girl be in trouble?
-
Sounds like Chopsticks Part 2
If you don't want nude pics of yourself floating about social media, don't pose for them! And I reckon it was probably leaked more so by so called "mates" of player concerned
-
hypothetical - what would happen if our future ladies team won a premiership and one of the women players got her boyfriend to pose at Punt Rd Oval with the medal around his wang?
would the guy be charged for indecent exposure? would the girl be in trouble?
The legal issue here Dooks is not the photo as such but the fact it has been allegedly posted on social media without the person in the photo's consent. That's what the cops are investigating
-
Sounds like Chopsticks Part 2
If you don't want nude pics of yourself floating about social media, don't pose for them! And I reckon it was probably leaked more so by so called "mates" of player concerned
Was thinking the same thing Julz
100% guarantee the lady in the 2nd photo outside the Punt Rd Oval is not the same as the lady in the medal
" Bella" does a hump day pic each Wednesday and was showing her support for the Tiges leading up to the GF
Never more nothing less
Hardly newsworthy
Unfortunately, Jack it became "news" (use that term very loosely) when a week after the event of the 1st photo appearing in social media the person in the first photo made a complaint to the cops (well that's how the HUN s reporting it).
-
And follks you know the rules - they've been in place long enough
Don't post rumours or start playing guessing games as to who the player is. Even what can be called "long bow" rumours
I've just removed a post like that.... it implied who the player could be by posting a "rumour"
The player hasn't been named publicly and until he is then there is to be no guessing or posting any unsubstantiated rumours
-
hypothetical - what would happen if our future ladies team won a premiership and one of the women players got her boyfriend to pose at Punt Rd Oval with the medal around his wang?
would the guy be charged for indecent exposure? would the girl be in trouble?
The legal issue here Dooks is not the photo as such but the fact it has been allegedly posted on social media without the person in the photo's consent. That's what the cops are investigating
is it not illegal to expose oneself in public outside punt rd oval? if there was a photo of a guys wang in the same place thats proof enough of indececent exposure? what about women? or do laws apply separately?
-
Just lie and say she said nothing and was happy for the photo to be taken and didnt request it deleted, stuff the bitch.
Stupid thing to do in hindsight but fair dinkum.
-
This is the biggest load of poo orchestrated by the ABC, when they cornered Peggy for this story to gain traction
Scum bags the lot of them and 100% this is chopstix all over again
-
And follks you know the rules - they've been in place long enough
Don't post rumours or start playing guessing games as to who the player is. Even what can be called "long bow" rumours
I've just removed a post like that.... it implied who the player could be by posting a "rumour"
The player hasn't been named publicly and until he is then there is to be no guessing or posting any unsubstantiated rumours
Which part of the above didn't people understand :banghead :banghead
Do not speculate, guess, post cryptic clues as to who it may or may not be
Can I make it any clearer???? :banghead :banghead
It isn't bloody hard :banghead :banghead
And yes I am fuming - as I said people know the rules, they haven't, don't and won't change in situations like this so I am at loss to understand why every time when something like this happens people ignore our requests. :banghead :banghead
-
hypothetical - what would happen if our future ladies team won a premiership and one of the women players got her boyfriend to pose at Punt Rd Oval with the medal around his wang?
would the guy be charged for indecent exposure? would the girl be in trouble?
The legal issue here Dooks is not the photo as such but the fact it has been allegedly posted on social media without the person in the photo's consent. That's what the cops are investigating
is it not illegal to expose oneself in public outside punt rd oval? if there was a photo of a guys wang in the same place thats proof enough of indececent exposure? what about women? or do laws apply separately?
Dooks. read my reply. I made it clear I am talking about this case. And in this case the issue is the first photo and the fact it was posted on social media without the persons consent.
Yes it is illegal to expose ones self in public. But one would think if it would bloody hard to charge someone with indecent exposure when it's not clear who the person in the photo is. If the photo was of a bloke and it didn't show their face in the photo who could they be charged unless they were caught in the act? And facts are using your scenario if a photo of a bloke ended up on social media without the person's consent then they have every right to lodge a complaint and have it investigated by the cops
Going by what Jack said person in the 2nd photo is not the same person in the 1st photo and it is the 1st photo that is supposedly being investigated by the cops because of a complaint
Think you are drawing a very long bow to suggest there is a separate laws here.
-
It is also being reported on the HUN website that the police are investigating but I can't post that article as it's behind their pesky paywall
Here's the Herald-Sun article:
Nude photo of Richmond fan wearing player’s Tigers premiership medal to be investigated by police
Aleks Devic,
Herald Sun
11 October 2017
POLICE are probing a Richmond star over a topless photo scandal showing a young woman wearing his AFL Premiership medal.
The woman has claimed she is a victim of revenge porn after the images of her topless were widely circulated online and through text messages without her permission or knowledge.
The Herald Sun can confirm the AFL Integrity Unit is investigating the leaked photo and has been dealing with the woman for several days.
It can be revealed while the female consented to the photo being taken, the Richmond player told her it had been deleted from his phone.
But instead, he kept the picture and sent it out to his friendship circle.
The story was broken exclusively on heraldsun.com.au at 7.15pm.
Victoria Police said in a statement: “Yarra Crime Investigation Unit detectives are investigating an image distributed on social media. The image was posted without consent. As the investigation is ongoing it would be inappropriate to comment further.”
The person who sent the images could be charged under “sexting” laws where adults who send intimate images without the consent of the other person face charges.
The offence carries a maximum penalty of up to two years in prison.
The photo emerged last week and was taken after Richmond’s triumphant Grand Final win over Adelaide sparking wild celebrations across the city.
The bare-breasted woman has also engaged lawyers to represent her during the process.
AFL spokesman Patrick Keane refused to comment on the incident.
“We don’t have any statement to provide you,” Mr Keane said.
Richmond president Peggy O’Neal, the league’s first female club president, said an investigation into the leaked photos would likely occur and described it as “terrible judgment”.
“If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women, we certainly don’t stand for that. That’s not what our club’s about and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture, then of course it will be taken into account,” she told ABC.
“That isn’t what we’re about, it isn’t what the AFL’s about. I think that our club has shown it’s for equality, it’s for inclusiveness, and it wants to promote women.”
The identity of the Richmond player who took the photo while the woman wore his medal has not been revealed.
A second photo has also emerged online showing another woman posing nude outside Tigers HQ baring the Richmond logo on it.
The Richmond Football Club on Tuesday night declined to comment on the police probe.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/probe-on-topless-photo-of-woman-wearing-richmond-premiership-medal/news-story/4dc05932971ea321010497bfe8973231
-
I find it strange that nowadays when we take photos with a phone the person allowing the photo to be taken does not expect it to be shared. Especially a photo like that!
Incredible.
-
Question: If your Mrs lets you take a nude of her in the bedroom for your eyes only, how would she feel if she saw it all over social media the next week?
-
I find it strange that nowadays when we take photos with a phone the person allowing the photo to be taken does not expect it to be shared. Especially a photo like that!
Incredible.
Is it disrespectful to share it without consent?
-
Your daughter came to you bawling and in distress..........
"Dad, I've done something stupid and now it's all over social media"
What happened sweety?
"I was out celebrating, I met a cute guy, we had a great time and we hooked up.
We were mucking around and I stupidly let him take a photo of me topless. I thought he was a nice guy and he said we'd meet up again. Next day my picture is all over social media. I'm so stupid!"
Question: What do you do Dad?
-
It may be disrespectful but getting police involved is over the top.
If the person is someone's partner I think it is a different situation. As a partner you have trust and a mutual love for one another. It is very different to a person you may have just met especially if you have had too much to drink. Exposing yourself to a drunk footballer and letting him take photos of you and then expecting them to stay private is naive. Of course it would depend if they explicitly said that they are not to be posted or shared makes it a different situation.
-
Your daughter came to you bawling and in distress..........
"Dad, I've done something stupid and now it's all over social media"
What happened sweety?
"I was out celebrating, I met a cute guy, we had a great time and we hooked up.
We were mucking around and I stupidly let him take a photo of me topless. I thought he was a nice guy and he said we'd meet up again. Next day my picture is all over social media. I'm so stupid!"
Question: What do you do Dad?
I have daughters so that is easy. I would tell her that she was stupid and that she's jeopardised her future employment. I can't blame the guy if she was so stupid.
It would be different if he took those photos without her consent.
-
It may be disrespectful but getting police involved is over the top.
If the person is someone's partner I think it is a different situation. As a partner you have trust and a mutual love for one another. It is very different to a person you may have just met especially if you have had too much to drink. Exposing yourself to a drunk footballer and letting him take photos of you and then expecting them to stay private is naive. Of course it would depend if they explicitly said that they are not to be posted or shared makes it a different situation.
Do you think consent would have to be sought to post the nude private image or consent must be given NOT to post a private nude photo?
Your daughter came to you bawling and in distress..........
"Dad, I've done something stupid and now it's all over social media"
What happened sweety?
"I was out celebrating, I met a cute guy, we had a great time and we hooked up.
We were mucking around and I stupidly let him take a photo of me topless. I thought he was a nice guy and he said we'd meet up again. Next day my picture is all over social media. I'm so stupid!"
Question: What do you do Dad?
I have daughters so that is easy. I would tell her that she was stupid and that she's jeopardised her future employment. I can't blame the guy if she was so stupid.
It would be different if he took those photos without her consent.
What if she was adamant she let him take the photo but didn't agree or expect him to post them all over social media.
-
I think you are now bringing up unrealistic scenarios but I will still answer them.
When you are drunk you don't tend to ask for consent if someone allows you to photograph them nude. It is implied as they hardly know you but are still happy to strip. You probably don't even realise that they may not want you to share the photos. That is why they need to specifically tell you that they do not want them shared.
-
She wants re$pect now?
Re$pect yourself.
-
The Kid whoever it is, is probably going through hell right about now. What i want to know is, did he at least drop the anchor.
-
The Kid whoever it is, is probably going through hell right about now. What i want to know is, did he at least drop the anchor.
I must be getting old.
WTF does "drop the anchor" mean?
:huh
-
What if she was adamant she let him take the photo but didn't agree or expect him to post them all over social media.
Therein lies the case. Question:
IF he asked if he could send the picture to some mates. She said no. He said, what about about snapchat, she said no. He said, just to a few of the boys on snapchat. She says okay, but perhaps doesn't feel comfortable about even that.
Is there a case?
-
Anyone seen the other shot LOL
Let's just say it involves 3 medals
Still curious if this is a thing :shh
Not sure how much I can say on this one, but am (indirectly) fairly close to the source :angel: :angel:
It may well blow up. Watch this space.
Not saying to name your source or anything, but care to elaborate? PM if needed
-
What if she was adamant she let him take the photo but didn't agree or expect him to post them all over social media.
Therein lies the case. Question:
IF he asked if he could send the picture to some mates. She said no. He said, what about about snapchat, she said no. He said, just to a few of the boys on snapchat. She says okay, but perhaps doesn't feel comfortable about even that.
Is there a case?
Yes there is a case. Consent isn't valid if the person is pressured or coerced into providing consent.
-
What if she was adamant she let him take the photo but didn't agree or expect him to post them all over social media.
Therein lies the case. Question:
IF he asked if he could send the picture to some mates. She said no. He said, what about about snapchat, she said no. He said, just to a few of the boys on snapchat. She says okay, but perhaps doesn't feel comfortable about even that.
Is there a case?
Yes there is a case. Consent isn't valid if the person is pressured or coerced into providing consent.
How much pressure is required to coerce?
If you say please, please please, is that coercion?
-
I think as a bloke you err on the side of caution. Respect yourself and respect others or treat others how you'd expect to be treated would be the better option.
In this case specifically better not share the photo with anyone and just keep it to yourself would be the safest and most respectful thing to do. Even if he shows his mates privately from his phone would be disrespectful but much better because the photos aren't going anywhere.
As I have daughters I'd expect them to do the same by respecting themselves and treating others how they'd want to be treated too.
If this happened to one of them then I'd be apoplectic.
-
What if she was adamant she let him take the photo but didn't agree or expect him to post them all over social media.
Therein lies the case. Question:
IF he asked if he could send the picture to some mates. She said no. He said, what about about snapchat, she said no. He said, just to a few of the boys on snapchat. She says okay, but perhaps doesn't feel comfortable about even that.
Is there a case?
Yes there is a case. Consent isn't valid if the person is pressured or coerced into providing consent.
How much pressure is required to coerce?
If you say please, please please, is that coercion?
I'd argue it is.
-
The Kid whoever it is, is probably going through hell right about now. What i want to know is, did he at least drop the anchor.
hahahahahaha GOLD
answer this question before we get to all this other nonsense
-
She wants re$pect now?
Re$pect yourself.
theres alot of truth in this
-
wasn't there dunno what the truth is. If it is legit, would be peeed off private kinky moments are supposed to be just that. If it is a sneaky stitchup attempt, peeed off as well. Not going to make assumptions because we know sweet FA.
-
What people are forgetting is the photo did not identify her. How can it be hurtful if nobody knows who she is????
-
Some people DO know who she is and have now seen her in the raw. I would suggest she probably feels a little embarrassed and humiliated.
-
What people are forgetting is the photo did not identify her. How can it be hurtful if nobody knows who she is????
Not sure thats quite right depending on who you listen to. Have read on twitter that people are claiming to have seen the "full" photo
Also, HUN now reporting the woman in the 2nd photo isnt the same one in the first one which confirmswhat jack posted last noght
-
What people are forgetting is the photo did not identify her. How can it be hurtful if nobody knows who she is????
Not sure thats quite right depending on who you listen to. Have read on twitter that people are claiming to have seen the "full" photo
Not true. None show her face.
I'll qualify that. No photo of her that has circulated to anyone I know, shows her face.
-
Those t@s look like Johnnos daughters
-
Woman in Richmond shot denies being in topless photo
Aleks Devic,
Herald Sun
11 October 2017 6:00pm
A woman with her back to the camera posed next to the Richmond FC logo has claimed she is being mistaken by celebrity friends as the topless woman wearing a 2017 Premiership medal.
The woman said she was an “international model” and had set up the picture showing her buttocks — with “Go Tiges” written on them — willingly and uploaded it to her own Instagram account.
She claims the social media account is private but one of her 27,000 followers copied the image and reposted it on social media sites elsewhere.
The woman claims she set up the picture willingly and uploaded it to her own Instagram account.
In a further twist, she also told the Herald Sun her celebrity sporting friends had contacted her to ask “why have you started this uproar?” in reference to the police investigation into the other topless photo that a Richmond player is alleged to have taken and distributed without the woman’s consent.
That photo is also subject to an internal investigation by Richmond Football Club and the AFL integrity unit.
“They (sporting celebrities) know me personally and they are asking me why I have caused this uproar,” she told the Herald Sun.
“They think I’m the woman with the breasts with the medallion.”
She refused to say whether any player was involved in setting up the photo she was involved in.
A friend of the model told the Herald Sun the Instagram account was only made private in the last couple of days, after the image had been uploaded on other sites.
Her Instagram account states she is Italian, a model, and a Melbourne girl.
She is followed by cityoflnkmelbourne, the tattoo parlour bought by former AFL player Jake King from jailed underworld figure and friend Toby Mitchell.
In her profile picture on her Instagram account, she is wearing a black see-through top.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/naked-woman-in-richmond-picture-denies-being-in-topless-photo/news-story/a503d3ecda45a7af75c1ebc3a52c2bae
-
AFL, Richmond need to act against player who circulated topless photo
Susie O’Brien,
Herald Sun
11 October 2017
A PHOTO of a naked woman should not be a symbol of victory passed around for the enjoyment of mates.
It’s not a bit of fun, as some are claiming. It’s the sort of thing that has the power to end careers, ruin relationships and even lead to suicide.
It is disgraceful that a photo of a topless woman wearing a Richmond premiership medal has been circulating in AFL circles for days now.
Some people are suggesting the woman was asking for trouble by posing for the photo in the first place.
I strongly disagree. A woman — or man — should be able to pose for an intimate picture without expecting it to do the rounds on social media.
It is understood the woman agreed to the photo being taken, but the player told her he’d deleted it from his phone. Instead it was forwarded on many, many times.
The circulation of the image on social media could be illegal because the woman in question didn’t give permission.
The player could be charged under new laws which prohibit adults from sending intimate images without consent.
The Victorian offence of distributing an image “contrary to community standards of acceptable conduct” carries a maximum penalty of up to two years in jail. Nationally, the penalty is three years for using a carriage service to harass or cause offence.
It’s concerning that many males commenting on social media are playing this issue down, with one noting that “showing pics of topless women to your mates is perfectly normal and has nothing to do with ‘revenge’ lol”.
Yes, things like this happen, but it doesn’t make it “normal”. It’s profoundly disturbing.
In Victoria, 30 per cent of those charged under sexting laws are aged 10 to 17 years, but this Richmond player is a grown man who cannot use ignorance as an excuse.
This act also violates a number of AFL policies on respect, privacy and social media engagement, as the Richmond player would be well aware.
The latter policy specifically outlaws the transmission of “sexually explicit material” and breaching the “reasonable expectation of privacy of a person”.
Richmond club president Peggy O’Neal has said the image is “not what our club is about”.
It’s now up to O’Neal, her board and the AFL to take a strong stand in addition to any police action. There’s no point in having policies if nothing happens when they are violated.
Let’s hope immediate and decisive action is taken against the player who circulated the image.
No doubt the club would be mindful that naming the player may lead to the woman’s identity being uncovered. However, the issue can be dealt with appropriately without further damage to the woman’s reputation.
Whether we like it or not, AFL players — especially those who win grand finals — are role models.
They should be subject to higher standards than the average person because of the elevated status they hold in our community.
While the AFL and many of its clubs should be congratulated for their moves to improve equality and end discrimination, the emergence of the photo shows more needs to be done.
Indeed, the culture within AFL HQ came under scrutiny earlier this year after it emerged that a number of senior executives were having affairs with more junior women.
For too long, men in power have gotten away with treating women like objects and sexual playthings.
Some, like former Miramax boss Harvey Weinstein, are allowed to sexually abuse women for decades because they are wealthy, well-connected and powerful.
A cone of silence protected Weinstein because he kept making hit movies that made a lot of money.
Let’s hope the same doesn’t happen in this case.
What a shameful issue to have to write about on the International Day of the Girl.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/susie-obrien/afl-richmond-tigers-need-to-act-against-player-who-circulated-topless-photo/news-story/7f5518f756fecd0c3120fc4693465c4a
-
Tigers want environment for women to 'thrive': Gale
afl.com.au
11 October 2017
RICHMOND boss Brendon Gale says the Tigers are committed to creating an environment for females to "thrive" as an investigation continues into the circulation of a photo of a topless woman.
The photo, featuring a woman wearing a premiership medallion, emerged on social media only hours after Richmond's drought-breaking Grand Final victory over Adelaide a fortnight ago.
A Victoria Police investigation is ongoing and a statement has already confirmed the image was posted without consent. A Tigers premiership player is reportedly part of the investigation.
The person responsible could be charged under the 2014 'sexting' laws, with a maximum penalty of two years in jail.
Gale said he was aware of the "circumstances" of the photo.
"We're committed to assisting police with any enquiries – should they be required – so at this stage it would be inappropriate to comment any further," Gale told reporters.
"What I will say is this club feels very strongly about the positive role women (play) at our club and in sport generally.
"This club feels very strongly about creating an environment where women can thrive, and this club feels very strongly about promoting attitudes and behaviours that are respectful of and supportive of women."
A second photo has emerged online of another naked woman, who is holding a football with her back to the camera, in front of a Tigers-themed wall.
It is not part of the police investigation.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-11/tigers-want-environment-for-women-to-thrive
-
starting to get a stink about it...
-
I find that article written by Susie O'Brien disturbing.
Maybe she knows a lot more about the case than I do, but I am yet to see or read anything that I would consider factual other than that a picture of a topless woman supposedly wearing an authentic premiership medal is being circulated.
Yet in her article, she is basically calling for the supposed perpetrators head without presumably knowing all the facts.
I am in no way defending the actions of anyone involved or making excuses. What I am saying is that I don't think anyone can comment to that extent on a case in which not all the facts are known.
I assume that once the full facts are known, and have possibly been tested in a court of law, that anyone responsible in the eyes of the law for a wrongdoing will be punished accordingly.
Given the possibility that indeed not is all as it seems in this case, at least not in alignment with the point of view expressed in her article, I assume we will see Susie O'Brien fall on her sword if the accusations' are fond to be baseless.
After all, as she says ""things like this happen, but it doesn’t make it “normal”. It’s profoundly disturbing."
-
Susie has a Hun agenda- who cares what she writes, it's no different in bias to what my mate Andrew Bolt posts..,,
-
As another poster said has Chopstickgate written all over it with people jumping to conclusions without the full facts
-
As another poster said has Chopstickgate written all over it with people jumping to conclusions without the full facts
This is what annoys me. Happens time and time again under the guise of being journalism.
If she wants the player to be held account for what she thinks happened, then she should be held account if her article turns out to be false.
-
What people are forgetting is the photo did not identify her. How can it be hurtful if nobody knows who she is????
Not sure thats quite right depending on who you listen to. Have read on twitter that people are claiming to have seen the "full" photo
Not true. None show her face.
I'll qualify that. No photo of her that has circulated to anyone I know, shows her face.
Believe you, just what is all a flutter on twitter
-
Caro has written about it.
Unfortunately I can't repost it; it's asking me to pay ofr the privilege ;D
-
WP you have the chop stix vibe about you on this topic. Hope i am wrong like you were then. :lol
dont worry about caro's article or anyone else trying to ruin our premiership vibe.
stuff em all i say
#11
-
Premiers baby.., Go you stuffing TIGERS
-
Susie mentioned female or male posing...
I would like to see a mans nipples posing with the medallion..
-
WP you have the chop stix vibe about you on this topic. Hope i am wrong like you were then. :lol
dont worry about caro's article or anyone else trying to ruin our premiership vibe.
stuff em all i say
#11
A vibe ala chopstick?
Not really.
I have a view that I will continue to keep to myself until the police finish their investigation.
All I will say is I'm peeved that a very special time for our footy club has been hijacked by 2 incredibly stupid individuals
And BTW now Robbo written his opnion piece piece on this as well
And the HUN (behind thier pesky paywall) are saying the cops have a list Tiger player phones they want to examine to find put whp distributed the photo
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/police-compile-hit-list-of-tigers-players-whose-phones-they-want-to-examine/news-story/327555a7fd51ae7ffbe2b32145dfb944&memtype=anonymous
-
Richmond topless photo: Police compile hit list of Tigers players whose phones they want to examine
ALEKS DEVIC AND DAVID HURLEY,
Herald Sun
12 October 2017
POLICE have drawn up a hit list of Richmond players whose phones they want to examine to find out who distributed the photo of a topless woman wearing a premiership medal.
The club said on Wednesday that it would co-operate with the police investigation.
The woman, who consented to the photo being taken by a player but who claims it was widely forwarded without her knowledge or permission, is said to be “distraught”.
One source said: “She is a victim of a serious criminal offence in all of this.”
A source close to sexting investigations said as part of the forensic probe, phone records would be examined: “That will prove who has seen the photo and shared the photo — you can’t hide the evidence trail.”
It is also open to detectives to issue warrants on social media providers, including WhatsApp, Snapchat and Instagram, to check the photo’s digital footprints.
The Herald Sun revealed on Wednesday that after the woman had posed for the photo — which did not show her face — the player who took it had assured her the image had been deleted.
Instead, he sent the photo to teammates and friends, as a result of which the racy image went viral, being shared in texts, online, and on social media platforms.
It is understood the photo was taken during the Tigers’ flag celebrations but surfaced only last week.
In its statement on Wednesday, Richmond Football Club said: “As the matter is subject to a police investigation, we will fully assist with their inquiries, should that be required.
“At the Richmond Football Club, we feel very strongly about the positive role of women at our club and in sport generally.
“We are committed to creating an environment where women can thrive and we are dedicated to promoting attitudes and behaviours that are respectful and supportive of women.”
The AFL was silent on the issue again yesterday despite its integrity unit looking into the incident and speaking to the woman.
Victoria Police would not provide further details.
“As the investigation is ongoing, it would be inappropriate to comment further,” a spokesman said.
Federal Attorney-General George Brandis also weighed in, saying the sharing of the photo was “not appropriate”.
“For a person’s image to be shared on social media without their consent, and potentially to go viral on social media, is a gross affront to their privacy,” Senator Brandis said.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/police-compile-hit-list-of-tigers-players-whose-phones-they-want-to-examine/news-story/327555a7fd51ae7ffbe2b32145dfb944
-
AFL's clumsy efforts to rewrite its respect and responsibility policy exposed
Caroline Wilson
The Age
12 October 2017
If it is true that a Richmond premiership player passed on to friends and teammates personal photographs of a semi-naked woman, then the Tigers cannot defend him. And the AFL, if required, must overrule the club and suspend him.
As damaging as this story could become for the club and as uncomfortable as it is for the image-conscious AFL, then just imagine how the young woman in question must feel. If what she has alleged took place - and certainly anyone who wants to has seen the photograph - then she has been violated and humiliated.
And you can only imagine what her parents must be going through. It was the family who took this sordid allegation to the club in a complaint that has finished up in the hands of police and again exposed the AFL's clumsy efforts to rewrite its respect and responsibility policy.
Now the woman in this case is traumatised and the AFL's role has been to reach out to support her. Richmond are silent and waiting for the results of the police investigation. Clearly this grubby story has dealt a major blow to a club that was rightly presenting as a new benchmark within the competition.
It seems frankly outrageous that anyone at Richmond could play down the allegations on the basis that the woman's face is not shown in the photograph with the premiership medal. If her accusations are confirmed then the AFL must take a stand on what amounts to "sexting'', a form of horrible social media abuse and violation and a practice that has become all too regular.
Almost eight years ago the AFL struggled with the issue when a nude photograph of Lara Bingle came to light, allegedly sent around after being taken by Brendan Fevola. To his credit, Adrian Anderson - who oversaw both football and integrity at the AFL - identified the seriousness of the allegation. This despite wide sections of the AFL community pointing the finger at Bingle's role in the affair. More recently, in 2014, Carlton did not wait for the long arm of the law to sack Josh Bootsma for a significantly more serious, sinister and systematic abuse on social media.
In a stark piece of irony, it is almost two years since another woman approached the Tigers and accused Dustin Martin of threatening her with a set of chopsticks in a Chapel Street restaurant. Martin was investigated by police, the AFL and Richmond and cleared.
Amid the confusion and lack of relevant guidelines, the AFL issued Martin with a suspended fine and president Peggy O'Neal later said the club regretted doing that deal because the player, in Richmond's view, had done nothing wrong.
By January 2016 AFL boss Gillon McLachlan said the league would review and rewrite its social policy because it was by then more than a decade old, out-dated and found wanting. Just as some protagonists in days past boasted to their mates, now they have a variety of electronic mechanisms to ensure the word is spread and widely, never mind the other party.
The Australian Human Rights commissioner, Kate Jenkins, - who had completed some effective work with the Victoria Police and the state's firefighting services - was seconded onto a high-profile working party, but the project floundered.
Passed from one AFL executive to the competition's new diversity chief Tanya Hosch, a social activist, in the second half of last year, Hosch then outsourced to the Canberra-based consultants Rapid Context. One year later, in August, after two senior married AFL executives had been sacked for having affairs with staffers, the 18 club chiefs were thoroughly sounded out for a policy overhaul over sexual abuse, harassment and discrimination.
Put through a scenario-based exercise at their annual two-day catch-up, some of the hypotheticals included "sexting''. The conversations that followed raised the complex parallel challenges thrown up when both the game and the law were investigating a complaint.
In short, 21 months have passed since McLachlan identified flaws in the AFL's respect and responsibility policy and still no modern improved replacement exists.
It is true that every case is different, but in this case the Richmond player, if guilty, should not only be fined, but suspended from the club for a period and probably for a number of games.
The AFL did not sufficiently stand up for Marc Murphy's wife during the season, putting the Jake Carlisle incident down to on-field sledging, but we suspect it will stand up now. As a self-declared community leader this presents the game with an ideal opportunity to make plain its disgust with social media abuse.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afls-clumsy-efforts-to-rewrite-its-respect-and-responsibility-policy-exposed-20171011-gyz2no.html
-
There’s nothing harmless about image abuse, it leaves a burden of shame
JULIE INMAN GRANT,
Herald Sun
12 October 2017
AS a Richmond fan, I rode the wave of jubilation when the Tigers broke their 37-year premiership drought to defeat Adelaide and win the AFL Grand Final two weeks ago. I’ve even sung the Richmond team song to my daughter as a lullaby.
Millions of Australians joined in the spirit of celebration after what was an incredible underdog victory, and we all witnessed scenes of revelry as the players and supporters celebrated their hard-fought achievement.
Today, those feelings are tinged with disappointment for many fans, including myself. According to reports, an intimate image of a young woman wearing a Richmond player’s premiership medal was shared without her consent.
In fact, the woman asked that the image be deleted. She was told it had been; however, the image was instead shared broadly with others online.
We call this image-based abuse. At the eSafety Office, we’ve made it a top priority to tackle this kind of insidious online practice. This month, we’ll be launching a national online portal and reporting tool to help Australians access tangible support when this online abuse occurs.
Sadly, the fact we’re seeing more high-profile cases of image-based abuse in the media is consistent with recent research which reveals that one in five Australians have been a victim of it.
As shocking as those statistics are, it’s worse for indigenous Australians and Australians with a disability. Fifty per cent of them have experienced image-based abuse.
For the victim, however, this is not a passing indiscretion that will blow over tomorrow. This will become a lasting part of that person’s digital footprint.
It’s important to remember that behind each of these images is a person, feeling violated and powerless. They will most likely feel intense angst as people try to discover their identity and publicly name and shame them.
Many victims who have been exposed in this way experience long-term anxiety, fear and depression. This is a fear that never really dissipates — not knowing where or when their compromising photos will pop up and be shown to friends, family, work colleagues or a current partner.
While the Richmond incident may be a cautionary tale of a victory march gone wrong, the simple fact of the matter is that the sharing of intimate images is becoming a normal courtship ritual among young people. It also represents a new form of peer pressure they are not equipped to resist. But the fact of the matter is that while many people may anecdotally understand the risks, few people are prepared for the fallout that ensues once an intimate image is shared online.
At the eSafety Office, we’ve received about 400 complaints about image-based abuse and we’ve had success in helping victims get their images removed online. Our ability to help victims in that way will soon be enhanced through the release of the portal.
However, we know that this is just the tip of the iceberg and that there are many more Australians we can help.
Serious cultural change needs to happen to stop this practice in its tracks. There are far too many passive players in image-based abuse — people we call “bystanders”. They see the images. They know it’s wrong, yet they still do nothing.
We all have a role to play in creating a culture of respect, where the “upstanders” outnumber the bystanders and where we no longer tolerate or trivialise the damage caused by image-based abuse.
As a society, we need to do more. It’s not acceptable to blame the victim for allowing the image to be taken in the first place. We need to focus on educating people about the importance of consent, respect, and empathy — it’s never acceptable to share someone’s intimate image without their consent.
THERE are many reasons someone might decide to share an image without consent. It could be seen as a harmless bit of fun or “entertainment” without a true appreciation of the potential devastation that can be caused.
We need to lead the way for our youth and teach them that respect must be universal and that online abuse is never acceptable.
As role models, the Richmond Football Club and the AFL have a unique opportunity to model good online behaviour and raise awareness about this issue. We’ve offered to support the AFL in developing their response and in training their players, coaches and staff.
In fact, whether you realise it or not, every day we set an example for young people, our friends and family.
That’s an incredible amount of power we possess and we have a responsibility to do the right thing whether it be on the field, off the field, online or offline.
Julie Inman Grant is the eSafety Commissioner
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/theres-nothing-harmless-about-image-abuse-it-leaves-a-burden-of-shame/news-story/85b1d0d491d601d15c36f74b3f6735e1
-
AFL stars not above law but photo scandal shouldn’t cost a player his job, writes Mark Robinson
MARK ROBINSON,
Herald Sun
October 12, 2017
BUFFOONERY is everywhere.
What started as fun with a photograph of a bare-breasted woman wearing a premiership medallion could end badly for a lot of people.
By Monday, the image was popular on social media.
By Tuesday, more people had seen it than attended the Grand Final.
By Wednesday, maybe it’s a million or two million people, such is the information highway.
Curious, though, why it took until Richmond president Peggy O’Neal was asked about the situation on the ABC on Monday night — nine days after the Grand Final — for it to become a serious issue.
It’s inconceivable that at least one of the AFL’s 600-odd staff wasn’t sent the photograph in those early days.
All the facts are yet to be determined.
The medal is legit, the picture was taken with the woman’s consent and it found its way to the internet.
How it got there is simple enough: A couple of taps of the mobile phone.
Who pushed the buttons is the question. If that person can be determined — and the accusation is it’s a Richmond player — then that player is in trouble with the law.
The player will likely be charged with transporting a pornographic image and doing so without consent, which is more than buffoonery. It is illegal.
The woman is probably beside herself that she trusted the photographer.
She would be embarrassed and feel deceived.
The problem is — and always will be — young people make mistakes. These days the evidence is much harder to extinguish.
This started as harmless fun and is a now a police investigation.
The blame for the picture being circulated is on the person who first pushed the send button.
Some people are insensitive to the woman because, you know, it’s only breasts and she was up for the photograph. It’s old-school thinking for a new-age crime.
There’s a reason a law is in place: To stop and discourage exactly what’s happened here.
Experts say sexting is a serious issue in society.
Clearly, no one has the right to post images of naked people on the internet without permission.
The AFL would be furious. It has been lambasted for its slow movement on its respect and responsibility policy towards women.
And now this — a direct hit to respect and responsibility towards women.
AFL boss Gillon McLachlan will have to act because the AFL can’t say it supports women and then allow this behaviour to remain unchallenged.
It’s not a hanging offence, either. If a player were to lose his job for being the first to send the image, that would be a gross over-reaction.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/expert-opinion/mark-robinson/afl-stars-not-above-law-but-photo-scandal-shouldnt-cost-a-player-his-job-writes-mark-robinson/news-story/cfe39f546ead7a744ad13f500c6e9583
-
I have a view that I will continue to keep to myself until the police finish their investigation.
All I will say is I'm peeved that a very special time for our footy club has been hijacked by 2 incredibly stupid individuals
I'm hearing you on this.
I will wait til all the facts are known, but if it transpires that our player/s have a case to answer in any way shape or form, I will be very disappointed that their actions have taken the shine off our premiership. Especially when you consider that the team has built such a strong bond.
I am still troubled though by the fact that there is so much media speculation about this. I understand the public interest and the media's need to satisfy it, but a number of journalists are presenting a lot of 'fact' which at this stage, seems to be speculation.
Hopefully the Police investigation can be concluded quickly so that the issue can be addressed one way or the other.
-
Caro has written about it.
Unfortunately I can't repost it; it's asking me to pay ofr the privilege ;D
For future reference, if you enter the title of the article in a Google search and click on the link, paywall averted for that article ;)
-
If it doesn't see her face I wonder how she can even prove the photo being circulated was of her rack and not some other willing lass?
Glad the other incident seems to be put to bed, the chick with 27,000+ followers on Instagram ... Good luck with that.
Otherwise there is no excuse for sharing photos like that without consent. It's disrespectful and to blame the woman and call her irresponsible is the same mentality as 'rape blame', which is to suggest that women should be accountable for their own sexual assaults and harassments for attracting that attention in the first place.
The responsibility lies with the offender, and unfortunately the statistics are damning against men I'm afraid.
Sounds like trouble...
-
What a load of bs
Who gives a stuff. It's no wonder people don't rate the police in this country, if this is a priority for them.
We won a flag WP it's only an issue if you let it be like those other clowns susie obrien and blobbo, who continually try to stay relevant.
Il say again. This was a set up by the ABC, and anyone who knows anything about that station will know how opportunistic and pathetic they are.
-
So this girl, who the player has never met poor to this, specifically goes to this event to hook up with a player. They both have a few drinks and then go off to sleep with each other. She then exposes herself to this stranger and allows herself to be photographed naked with the medal. She already displays she is hardly worried about privacy. She has exposed herself to a perfect stranger. At some point along the line, she asks for the photo to be deleted. We don't know whether the player was drunk at this time and even if agreed, can he remember agreeing later as he sent the photo off the next day.
I'm not condoning his actions, but it is hardly a hangable offence. You could argue she was almost predatory. What's to say she did not set this up? Whose idea was it to wear the medal? She agreed to the photo. Why? We all no deleting things off phones/computers never is totally successful as it can be found again by certain software.
There's a lot we don't know here.
-
So this girl, who the player has never met poor to this, specifically goes to this event to hook up with a player. They both have a few drinks and then go off to sleep with each other. She then exposes herself to this stranger and allows herself to be photographed naked with the medal. She already displays she is hardly worried about privacy. She has exposed herself to a perfect stranger. At some point along the line, she asks for the photo to be deleted. We don't know whether the player was drunk at this time and even if agreed, can he remember agreeing later as he sent the photo off the next day.
I'm not condoning his actions, but it is hardly a hangable offence. You could argue she was almost predatory. What's to say she did not set this up? Whose idea was it to wear the medal? She agreed to the photo. Why? We all no deleting things off phones/computers never is totally successful as it can be found again by certain software.
There's a lot we don't know here.
All that is well and good Doc but obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
-
So this girl, who the player has never met poor to this, specifically goes to this event to hook up with a player. They both have a few drinks and then go off to sleep with each other. She then exposes herself to this stranger and allows herself to be photographed naked with the medal. She already displays she is hardly worried about privacy. She has exposed herself to a perfect stranger. At some point along the line, she asks for the photo to be deleted. We don't know whether the player was drunk at this time and even if agreed, can he remember agreeing later as he sent the photo off the next day.
I'm not condoning his actions, but it is hardly a hangable offence. You could argue she was almost predatory. What's to say she did not set this up? Whose idea was it to wear the medal? She agreed to the photo. Why? We all no deleting things off phones/computers never is totally successful as it can be found again by certain software.
There's a lot we don't know here.
All that is well and good Doc but obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
this
-
So this girl, who the player has never met poor to this, specifically goes to this event to hook up with a player. They both have a few drinks and then go off to sleep with each other. She then exposes herself to this stranger and allows herself to be photographed naked with the medal. She already displays she is hardly worried about privacy. She has exposed herself to a perfect stranger. At some point along the line, she asks for the photo to be deleted. We don't know whether the player was drunk at this time and even if agreed, can he remember agreeing later as he sent the photo off the next day.
I'm not condoning his actions, but it is hardly a hangable offence. You could argue she was almost predatory. What's to say she did not set this up? Whose idea was it to wear the medal? She agreed to the photo. Why? We all no deleting things off phones/computers never is totally successful as it can be found again by certain software.
There's a lot we don't know here.
All that is well and good Doc but obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
this
this
-
Yeah the cops are funny about what is important. Bloke rammed my motorbike with his 4wd knocked me into another vehicle in a road rage incident about 4 months ago. Rang 000, had witnesses etc. They told me to wait so I dragged my bike off of the road. Nobody came. Rang the station told me they were busy and asked if I could come to the station if my bike was ok to ride. Some ice head had just tried to murder me with his dual cab. Had to jury rig a peg from the back one because the idiot had snapped the front one off, went in, gave them the pricks number plate. They never got back to me. Sister in laws car gets broken into, cop is around here in a flash, flirting with her and ringing her back with follow ups despite the fact there is a snowballs chance in hell anything is going to be able to be done about the handfull of change and bs trinkets will ever be recovered that were stolen. That is the Vic Pols priorities. If is going to be on the news, they will make a big deal out of it.
-
What a load of bs
Who gives a stuff. It's no wonder people don't rate the police in this country, if this is a priority for them.
We won a flag WP it's only an issue if you let it be like those other clowns susie obrien and blobbo, who continually try to stay relevant.
Il say again. This was a set up by the ABC, and anyone who knows anything about that station will know how opportunistic and pathetic they are.
You go out for a night of celebration because your team has won a premiership after a 37 year long drought. Excited, you down a few drinks and despite your normal shy apprehension among women, you find yourself a little more talkative than usual and you take a chance on a pretty young woman normally out of your league.
You find that she's a real generally decent girl, you have excellent conversation, she even laughs at your lame jokes and your surprised to learn she actually thinks your big noses is "kinda sexy".
After a long night of drinks and talking, you both are very comfortable with each other, the flirting is thick and the body language is telling you this chick might be up for a long night and if you play your cards right, she might be willing to come and see your bungalow at the back of your parents place. She whispers in your ear she's got a kinky side to her and she's keen to let you know what it might be.
As the night progresses you really feel this chick might be ready and just before you can ask her back to yours she asks you to come back to her place and thankfully you don't need to show her that even at 40 you still live with your parents.
Your at hers and it's very intimate and things are getting steamy and she undresses and your a bit shy but you get down to your wire fronts and she's all over you like a Jacob Townsend tackle. She's so keen she whips down your undies and freezes in shock. You both are still for what seems an eternity.
She says, "it's so cute", as she tries not to laugh at the size.
"Normally guys with big noses mean the opposite is true, but I thinks it's the cutest little thing I've ever seen", she says in a baby voice.
She assures you over and over despite it being the smallest and she assured you it's ok so you get over it quick as this girl is pretty decent and is saying all the right things to make you feel good.
You have a great night of love making and you even take a kinky photo of each other as she makes your feel comfortable about yourself despite your tiny penis.
The next morning you go out for breakfast together and she even says that you should keep in touch.
By the end of the day you see your puny little dick all over the internet.
Question: How do you feel about this now?
-
I am sorry that happened to your "friend".
How small are we talking like 3 inches?
-
HAHAHA chuck.
I will say again who gives a flying stuff.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
An opportunistic attempt by the susie obriens of this world to bring down the club and men in general is what this is.
-
I am sorry that happened to your "friend".
How small are we talking like 3 inches?
Better ask Francois.
HAHAHA chuck.
I will say again who gives a flying stuff.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
An opportunistic attempt by the susie obriens of this world to bring down the club and men in general is what this is.
Have you got daughters? If it happened to one of them without there permission would you feel the same way?
Just because you put yourself in a vulnerable position with one person doesn't mean it has to be shared with the rest of the world.
-
HAHAHA chuck.
I will say again who gives a flying stuff.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
An opportunistic attempt by the susie obriens of this world to bring down the club and men in general is what this is.
IMO, Susie O'Brien is an insignificant part of this. She demonstrated as much with her unsubstantiated article in the HUN.
But some of the other journalists are making some important points.
At the end of the day, the facts need to come out and be dealt with accordingly.
-
What a load of bs
Who gives a stuff. It's no wonder people don't rate the police in this country, if this is a priority for them.
We won a flag WP it's only an issue if you let it be like those other clowns susie obrien and blobbo, who continually try to stay relevant.
Il say again. This was a set up by the ABC, and anyone who knows anything about that station will know how opportunistic and pathetic they are.
You go out for a night of celebration because your team has won a premiership after a 37 year long drought. Excited, you down a few drinks and despite your normal shy apprehension among women, you find yourself a little more talkative than usual and you take a chance on a pretty young woman normally out of your league.
You find that she's a real generally decent girl, you have excellent conversation, she even laughs at your lame jokes and your surprised to learn she actually thinks your big noses is "kinda sexy".
After a long night of drinks and talking, you both are very comfortable with each other, the flirting is thick and the body language is telling you this chick might be up for a long night and if you play your cards right, she might be willing to come and see your bungalow at the back of your parents place. She whispers in your ear she's got a kinky side to her and she's keen to let you know what it might be.
As the night progresses you really feel this chick might be ready and just before you can ask her back to yours she asks you to come back to her place and thankfully you don't need to show her that even at 40 you still live with your parents.
Your at hers and it's very intimate and things are getting steamy and she undresses and your a bit shy but you get down to your wire fronts and she's all over you like a Jacob Townsend tackle. She's so keen she whips down your undies and freezes in shock. You both are still for what seems an eternity.
She says, "it's so cute", as she tries not to laugh at the size.
"Normally guys with big noses mean the opposite is true, but I thinks it's the cutest little thing I've ever seen", she says in a baby voice.
She assures you over and over despite it being the smallest and she assured you it's ok so you get over it quick as this girl is pretty decent and is saying all the right things to make you feel good.
You have a great night of love making and you even take a kinky photo of each other as she makes your feel comfortable about yourself despite your tiny penis.
The next morning you go out for breakfast together and she even says that you should keep in touch.
By the end of the day you see your puny little dick all over the internet.
Question: How do you feel about this now?
s'funny, same thing happened to... er, my friend, what was her name?? :lol :lol
-
This is such a media mine field. I blame slow trade week.
The girl is a players partner. She isnt laying chargers she's getting police involved to try and get social media posts taken down. Unfortunately nothing can be done.
Media blown it up and raised new laws. She won't press charges obviously but now it's blown up for action to be taken to set example.
As a high school teacher, this sexting stuff is awful and happens fair too much. The law needs to be there as too many young kids are having their lives seriously ruined. Unfortunately can see a young tiger get made an example of.
-
Image-based abuse is a crime
Clementine Ford
The Age
12 October 2017
It was probably too much to expect that the aftermath of an AFL season would pass without some incident of sexual harassment or abuse, but I have always been relentlessly optimistic. Thankfully, one member of the Richmond football team went above and beyond to maintain the tradition of men committing crimes against women on Grand Final night. Sorry, I mean "allegedly".
The as yet unnamed player is being investigated by Victoria Police after non-consensually circulating an intimate sexual image through both social media and private text messages. In the photograph, a woman is pictured topless while wearing the player's premiership medal. According to this report, the victim says she consented to the photograph being taken but was assured it would be deleted. Victoria Police have confirmed in a statement that the image was posted without consent.
I've seen this behaviour described as "revenge porn" across a number of news outlets today, with even the woman alleging the harassment referring to it as such. Revenge porn is the popular term for behaviour that sees a person or persons use exploitative, pornographic images to intentionally humiliate another human being, but it's a misnomer that has the misfortune of making a straightforward crime sound salacious and naughty. That word "crime" is important – because no matter what you might personally think about this being a bit of "harmless fun" or "boys being boys", the fact remains that it is a crime in Victoria to participate in image-based abuse, with the offence carrying a maximum penalty of up to two years in prison.
Unsurprisingly, I've also seen a cross section of reprehensible comments in response to the breaking of this story. Victim blaming is rife, with some fans on the Richmond Tigers Supporter Group Facebook page gleefully offering their views that the woman is partly or wholly to blame because, hey, we know what fellas are like.
"If she didn't give the consent to take the photo in the first place, she wouldn't be in this predicament. She allowed to be taken. She was just after her 15 mins [sic]," said "Stephanie Anne".
"Neal Augustus" wrote: "Stupid typical footy groupie now she will claim foul play the works. If you don't want that to happen why be around a group of AFL players drinking and striping. Just typical footy groupie story [sic]."
"George Murray" opted for none of his own words, instead just posting a meme of Kim Richards (a cast member for The Real Housewives of Beverley Hills) yelling, "You're a slut pig!"
The next time you feel tempted to dismiss feminism as a man-hating ideology that paints all men as rapists, spend a bit of time around the kind of Average Austrayans who argue that "footy groupies" are "sluts" who "should have known better" whenever allegations of sexual misconduct against famous men arise. It isn't feminists who believe men can't control themselves or be trusted – it's the people who think women need to be wary around groups of men because those men can't be held responsible for their actions.
These views are in the same category as those offered by designer Donna Karan this week. In response to a question regarding the allegations of widespread sexual abuse and assault emerging against the Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, Karan described Weinstein and his wife as "wonderful people". She went on to say, "I think we need to look at ourselves ... how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women? What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?"
Karan has since apologised for the comments, saying they were "not representative" of her views.
It's nothing short of infuriating that someone would make this argument in the first place, let alone someone whose entire business model hinges on "presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality" in her clothing line, but there is very little logic to a victim blaming mentality. Women are not the gatekeepers of male sexuality or behaviour. It isn't our responsibility to stop them from engaging in criminal activity. But it's perplexing how many people seem willing – eager even – to downgrade the committing of these kinds of illegal acts to just a bit of boyish, harmless fun that is at least partly if not wholly the fault of the women involved.
The president of the Richmond Football Club, Peggy O'Neal, has described the actions of the player as "terrible judgment", saying, "If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women, we certainly don't stand for that. That's not what our club's about and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture, then of course it will be taken into account." She went on to say: "I think that our club has shown it's for equality, it's for inclusiveness, and it wants to promote women."
A reminder to Ms O'Neal: circulating image-based abuse without consent among your teammates isn't just "disrespectful to women", it's a criminal offence. If the Richmond Football Club is for equality and inclusiveness in the way it claims to be, it will issue a severe penalty against the player responsible and all those who forwarded the image afterwards. Something along the lines of losing his job would be a good start.
After all, what did he expect?
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/a-reminder-to-the-richmond-football-club-and-fans-imagebased-abuse-is-a-crime-20171011-gyywvb.html
-
Yeah the cops are funny about what is important. Bloke rammed my motorbike with his 4wd knocked me into another vehicle in a road rage incident about 4 months ago. Rang 000, had witnesses etc. They told me to wait so I dragged my bike off of the road. Nobody came. Rang the station told me they were busy and asked if I could come to the station if my bike was ok to ride. Some ice head had just tried to murder me with his dual cab. Had to jury rig a peg from the back one because the stuffer had snapped the front one off, went in, gave them the pricks number plate. They never got back to me. Sister in laws car gets broken into, cop is around here in a flash, flirting with her and ringing her back with follow ups despite the fact there is a snowballs chance in hell anything is going to be able to be done about the handfull of change and bs trinkets will ever be recovered that were stolen. That is the Vic Pols priorities. If is going to be on the news, they will make a big deal out of it.
cant say im surprised.
-
As a high school teacher, this sexting stuff is awful and happens fair far too much. The law needs to be there as too many young kids are having their lives seriously ruined. Unfortunately can see a young tiger get made an example of.
Hope you're not an English teacher.
:cheers
-
Image-based abuse is a crime
Clementine Ford
The Age
12 October 2017
It was probably too much to expect that the aftermath of an AFL season would pass without some incident of sexual harassment or abuse, but I have always been relentlessly optimistic. Thankfully, one member of the Richmond football team went above and beyond to maintain the tradition of men committing crimes against women on Grand Final night. Sorry, I mean "allegedly".
The as yet unnamed player is being investigated by Victoria Police after non-consensually circulating an intimate sexual image through both social media and private text messages. In the photograph, a woman is pictured topless while wearing the player's premiership medal. According to this report, the victim says she consented to the photograph being taken but was assured it would be deleted. Victoria Police have confirmed in a statement that the image was posted without consent.
I've seen this behaviour described as "revenge porn" across a number of news outlets today, with even the woman alleging the harassment referring to it as such. Revenge porn is the popular term for behaviour that sees a person or persons use exploitative, pornographic images to intentionally humiliate another human being, but it's a misnomer that has the misfortune of making a straightforward crime sound salacious and naughty. That word "crime" is important – because no matter what you might personally think about this being a bit of "harmless fun" or "boys being boys", the fact remains that it is a crime in Victoria to participate in image-based abuse, with the offence carrying a maximum penalty of up to two years in prison.
Unsurprisingly, I've also seen a cross section of reprehensible comments in response to the breaking of this story. Victim blaming is rife, with some fans on the Richmond Tigers Supporter Group Facebook page gleefully offering their views that the woman is partly or wholly to blame because, hey, we know what fellas are like.
"If she didn't give the consent to take the photo in the first place, she wouldn't be in this predicament. She allowed to be taken. She was just after her 15 mins [sic]," said "Stephanie Anne".
"Neal Augustus" wrote: "Stupid typical footy groupie now she will claim foul play the works. If you don't want that to happen why be around a group of AFL players drinking and striping. Just typical footy groupie story [sic]."
"George Murray" opted for none of his own words, instead just posting a meme of Kim Richards (a cast member for The Real Housewives of Beverley Hills) yelling, "You're a slut pig!"
The next time you feel tempted to dismiss feminism as a man-hating ideology that paints all men as rapists, spend a bit of time around the kind of Average Austrayans who argue that "footy groupies" are "sluts" who "should have known better" whenever allegations of sexual misconduct against famous men arise. It isn't feminists who believe men can't control themselves or be trusted – it's the people who think women need to be wary around groups of men because those men can't be held responsible for their actions.
These views are in the same category as those offered by designer Donna Karan this week. In response to a question regarding the allegations of widespread sexual abuse and assault emerging against the Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, Karan described Weinstein and his wife as "wonderful people". She went on to say, "I think we need to look at ourselves ... how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women? What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?"
Karan has since apologised for the comments, saying they were "not representative" of her views.
It's nothing short of infuriating that someone would make this argument in the first place, let alone someone whose entire business model hinges on "presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality" in her clothing line, but there is very little logic to a victim blaming mentality. Women are not the gatekeepers of male sexuality or behaviour. It isn't our responsibility to stop them from engaging in criminal activity. But it's perplexing how many people seem willing – eager even – to downgrade the committing of these kinds of illegal acts to just a bit of boyish, harmless fun that is at least partly if not wholly the fault of the women involved.
The president of the Richmond Football Club, Peggy O'Neal, has described the actions of the player as "terrible judgment", saying, "If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women, we certainly don't stand for that. That's not what our club's about and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture, then of course it will be taken into account." She went on to say: "I think that our club has shown it's for equality, it's for inclusiveness, and it wants to promote women."
A reminder to Ms O'Neal: circulating image-based abuse without consent among your teammates isn't just "disrespectful to women", it's a criminal offence. If the Richmond Football Club is for equality and inclusiveness in the way it claims to be, it will issue a severe penalty against the player responsible and all those who forwarded the image afterwards. Something along the lines of losing his job would be a good start.
After all, what did he expect?
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/a-reminder-to-the-richmond-football-club-and-fans-imagebased-abuse-is-a-crime-20171011-gyywvb.html
Guilty until proven innocent - exhibit A
-
I do like the way Clem shames people for the stupid takes on things. Good stuff!
-
I am sorry that happened to your "friend".
How small are we talking like 3 inches?
Better ask Francois.
Ok thanks, I was just going to say that I'm three inches wide and its nothing to be ashamed about
-
I am sorry that happened to your "friend".
How small are we talking like 3 inches?
Better ask Francois.
Ok thanks, I was just going to say that I'm three inches wide and its nothing to be ashamed about
It’s all about perspective. If you put small hands around it then it look enormous.
-
This sounds like a case for Super Fem Clem....
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/31/03/43BBD24B00000578-4838780-image-a-48_1504148369535.jpg)
(https://imgfast.net/users/3115/50/25/04/smiles/2506532406.gif)
Image-based abuse is a crime
Clementine Ford
The Age
12 October 2017
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/a-reminder-to-the-richmond-football-club-and-fans-imagebased-abuse-is-a-crime-20171011-gyywvb.html
:shh
-
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
-
Her Instagram account states she is Italian, a model, and a Melbourne girl.
She is followed by cityoflnkmelbourne, the tattoo parlour bought by former AFL player Jake King from jailed underworld figure and friend Toby Mitchell.
In her profile picture on her Instagram account, she is wearing a black see-through top.
Just in case anyone wants to stalk her but old mate doesn't have the balls to outright name her :lol
-
I do like the way Clem shames people for the stupid takes on things. Good stuff!
Yes I imagine she would've excelled during the cultural revolution chairing public "struggle sessions" in the town squares.... :clapping
-
No one in society is held responsible for his/her own actions anymore.
What a PC overreaction to what really is nothing!
-
I am sorry that happened to your "friend".
How small are we talking like 3 inches?
Better ask Francois.
Ok thanks, I was just going to say that I'm three inches wide and its nothing to be ashamed about
Ch0de17
-
Richmond medal photo: leaked naked picture ‘disgusting’
The Australian
12 October 2017
The Victorian businesswoman who was instrumental in the birth of the AFL’s women’s league has labelled Richmond FC’s leaked topless photo scandal “disgusting” and called for players to be better educated on gender equality.
Susan Alberti, the former vice-president of the Western Bulldogs, told The Australian she knew about the topless photo a week before it appeared in newspapers but she’s strongly backing AFL chief executive Gillon McLachan and Richmond president Peggy O’Neal’s handling of the leak.
“It’s important that this isn’t just brushed aside. ‘Ho hum’. It’s not ‘ho hum’, it’s no laughing matter,” she said.
“We have to keep reinforcing with both our male and female players that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable, we’ve worked really hard at my club to ingrain respect and responsibility but we’re not perfect. we have to do more.”
There is currently a police investigation underway in to how a picture of the woman circulated and the player could face up to two years jail under tough sexting laws in Victoria.
“The first reaction I had when I saw the news was that I was disgusted, and I really feel for this young woman and her family, it’s unacceptable,” she said.
Ms Alberti declined to comment on what advice she would have for Ms O’Neal, the only female president of an AFL club, but said “I’m sure Peggy and the board are dealing with the matter very seriously.”
She was also adamant in her support for the sporting code’s chief, Mr McLachlan, who has also recently had to deal with senior male staff as the football commission leaving over inappropriate relationships with young women at the league.
“Gill really is doing his darnedest and he’s worked so hard to ensure there’s greater respect for women in the industry; he’s been terrific.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/richmond-tigers-leaked-photo-scandal-disgusting/news-story/372d83c32831d5881c98e85697ed29f3
-
guilty until proven innocent - Evidence part 2
-
(http://cloud-3.steamusercontent.com/ugc/156902491449365045/A315C87826F3E661E18F37C9548BBBBA6D73C720/)
-
What happens if player X was a friend of Medal Wearing Lady 🤔🤔
-
What happens if player X was a friend of Medal Wearing Lady 🤔🤔
Then i reckon there is a huge chance they are no longer friends
-
What happens if player X was a friend of Medal Wearing Lady 🤔🤔
Then i reckon there is a huge chance they are no longer friends
Yeah I'd dump her too if she betrayed an agreement.
-
What happens if player X was a friend of Medal Wearing Lady 🤔🤔
Seriously, legally it makes no difference
If player X has distributed photo without Medal Waering Ladies permission and it can be proven, then player X is in strife, huge strife. That's the law as it stands
-
Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?
-
I'm not a fan of "east west" st Moritz
-
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
-
So, moral of the story, much like wanking, keep your tit pics to yourself.
-
Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?
That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.
As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW
There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint
they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made
If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome
The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason
I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is
-
Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?
That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.
As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW
There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint
they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made
If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome
The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason
I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is
i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.
as i said in an earlier post.....
......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
-
i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.
as i said in an earlier post.....
......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.
I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?
What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?
Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here
And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.
-
Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?
That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.
As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW
There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint
they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made
If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome
The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason
I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is
Thanks for the elucidation. The law is the law.
The pics that are circulation do not have her face shown, is that the case??
If it identified her that is another matter. Gee we have all seen pics of famous people in compromising situations as a matter of press/paparazzi reporting.
If Jo Blo had taken her pic and distributed it, instead of a Tiger Premiership Player, would it get this far??
Could their be a sniff of opportunism here??
-
i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.
as i said in an earlier post.....
......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.
I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?
What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?
Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here
And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.
If the roles were reversed, we wouldn't have heard a thing about it .
Is it his girlfriend or just some chick who rooted hi. Because he played in a premiership.
All these things paint the character of the woman and expose her agenda.
-
i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.
as i said in an earlier post.....
......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.
Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.
I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?
What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?
Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here
And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.
If the roles were reversed, we wouldn't have heard a thing about it .
Is it his girlfriend or just some chick who rooted hi. Because he played in a premiership.
All these things paint the character of the woman and expose her agenda.
yes re roles reversed.
Just because your the man in these alleged circumstances doesnt mean you are automatically a poo human being and the woman is the gold standard of integrity and a damsel in distress. This is the automatic assumption in the absence of information for many.
if the guy is found guilty then fair enough and cop his whack but if he is not, and theres evidence of funny business on her part then she should cop her medicine.
cant have it both ways.
-
cant have it both ways.
No, you can't. And I am sure you don't in the eyes of the law.
But as WP pointed out, there is a massive difference in this situation. Swan and Cloke did not make it a formal complaint to the Police.
If the woman in this situation hadn't, then apart from the fringe lunatics like Ford, this story would not have existed. Let's face it, plenty of people had seen the photo and did not apparently find the need to comment until the woman went to the Police. Now it is viral.
-
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
I hope Marissa and Jon got sacked
-
And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.
It's all well and good to say there was no police investigation into that matter because the players didn't make a complaint but surely you're missing the bigger picture here. Where was the public outcry of these people committing a crime and engaging in image-based abuse? Where was the calls for prison time, despite the fact of anyone outside the inner circle knowing what truly conspired. Don't give me the "they didn't complain to police" because yes that would limit the possibility of prison time, or at least a charge made, but these people are still calling for it DESPITE not knowing any of the facts. I thought the whole purpose of the police investigation was to get the facts, charge or clear the individual then allow people to make judgement/comments. Seems people have jumped straight to making judgements/comments. It's a one way street and complaining to police does not justify it.
-
Actually YR there was a lot of public outcry and disgust when those images were published. Even Dios girl Clem wrote an article lambasting WD and the perpetrators that shared the images against the subjects will. I poo you not.
As for it being a crime, well as I understand the new Revenge Porn laws were only enacted recently. Different story back then.
-
Actually YR there was a lot of public outcry and disgust when those images were published. Even Dios girl Clem wrote an article lambasting WD and the perpetrators that shared the images against the subjects will. I poo you not.
As for it being a crime, well as I understand the new Revenge Porn laws were only enacted recently. Different story back then.
Interesting, must have missed that one but I'm positive that that isn't the only example of unfair treatment.
On a side note, and I'm not giving an opinion or hinting at an opinion with this, have a look at this article. It just popped up for me and the relevance of it is all too amusing
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969900/Doctor-s-indecent-assault-conviction-CONSENSUAL-sex.html
Strong disclaimer: this is an article from the dailymail :lol
-
Thanks for the elucidation. The law is the law.
The pics that are circulation do not have her face shown, is that the case??
If it identified her that is another matter. Gee we have all seen pics of famous people in compromising situations as a matter of press/paparazzi reporting.
If Jo Blo had taken her pic and distributed it, instead of a Tiger Premiership Player, would it get this far??
Could their be a sniff of opportunism here??
No her face is not shown, her face doesn't need to be shown
It has absolutely no relevance regarding the police investigation and law pertaining to the investigation
If the photo had been taken by someone else would it have got this far? Who knows?
Would she have made a complaint who knows? If she had made a complaint against "Joe Blo" would we know about it? Absolutely not. Just like we don't know of the cases that have been successfully prosecuted under these laws since there introduction.
Clearly if it didn't involve a footballer it wouldn't' be in the news
Opportunism at play? Possibly
But more than anything else this "mess' has been caused by the absolute stupidity by 2 people
-
Can I ask what degree of speculation will be tolerated on this thread - that is, I'd like to take things up a notch or two with some inferences.
-
Inb4 nothing happens.
-
Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?
That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.
As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.
You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO
Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?
and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?
http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/
Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW
There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint
they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made
If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome
The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason
I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is
The offence is under section 41DA of the Summary Offences Act 1966(Vic) which states as follows:
"(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) A intentionally distributes an intimate image
of another person (B) to a person other than
B; and
(b) the distribution of the image is contrary to
community standards of acceptable conduct.
Example
A person (A) posts a photograph of another person (B) on a
social media website without B's express or implied consent
and the photograph depicts B engaged in sexual activity.
(2) A person who commits an offence against
subsection (1) is liable to level 7 imprisonment
(2 years maximum).
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to A if—
(a) B is not a person under the age of 18 years;
and
(b) B had expressly or impliedly consented, or
could reasonably be considered to have
expressly or impliedly consented, to—
(i) the distribution of the intimate image;
and
(ii) the manner in which the intimate image
was distributed."
Victorian Parliamentary website.
-
Can I ask what degree of speculation will be tolerated on this thread - that is, I'd like to take things up a notch or two with some inferences.
As per usual, what has been made public in the mainstream media (with links).
-
Can I ask what degree of speculation will be tolerated on this thread - that is, I'd like to take things up a notch or two with some inferences.
As per usual, what has been made public in the mainstream media (with links).
FFS Dooks, how many times do you have to be told.
:lol
-
hmmmmm......well thats that then >:(
-
From Barrett's Sliding Doors column today:
IF ..... the system is going to come down hard on the player who initially distributed the photo ...
THEN .... the system must also come down hard on those who distributed it. Intrigued as to what the system will do. Respect. Responsibility.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-13/sliding-doors-trade-period
-
#GroupieGate
-
From Barrett's Sliding Doors column today:
IF ..... the system is going to come down hard on the player who initially distributed the photo ...
THEN .... the system must also come down hard on those who distributed it. Intrigued as to what the system will do. Respect. Responsibility.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-13/sliding-doors-trade-period
From Knighters sliding doors column today:
IF.......ambulance chasing, lazy, boring, geeky boy journo's continue to write crap without any supporting evidence or facts
THEN..... their accreditation should be revoked and they should never be allowed to enter an AFL ground again
-
From Barrett's Sliding Doors column today:
IF ..... the system is going to come down hard on the player who initially distributed the photo ...
THEN .... the system must also come down hard on those who distributed it. Intrigued as to what the system will do. Respect. Responsibility.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-13/sliding-doors-trade-period
From Knighters sliding doors column today:
IF.......ambulance chasing, lazy, boring, geeky boy journo's continue to write crap without any supporting evidence or facts
THEN..... their accreditation should be revoked and they should never be allowed to enter an AFL ground again
:clapping
Edit: fixed quoting
-
How about if he was just supporting her freed nipples for her rights as a woman not to feel ashamed of her body? I have got nipples, I don't feel ashamed of them and she is making me feel ashamed of them now, I want her to stop shaming my body by making me feel like my nipples are dirty !
-
How about if he was just supporting her freed nipples for her rights as a woman not to feel ashamed of her body? I have got nipples, I don't feel ashamed of them and she is making me feel ashamed of them now, I want her to stop shaming my body by making me feel like my nipples are dirty !
i am offended on your behalf.
-
How about if he was just supporting her freed nipples for her rights as a woman not to feel ashamed of her body? I have got nipples, I don't feel ashamed of them and she is making me feel ashamed of them now, I want her to stop shaming my body by making me feel like my man boobs are dirty and hairy.
Efa
-
Barrett the leftist fucktard
-
Tough response needed by Richmond, AFL in nude photo text scandal, writes Mark Robinson
MARK ROBINSON,
Herald Sun
14 October 2017
RICHMOND will unveil its premiership flag at the MCG in Round 1 next year, probably in front of 90,000 fans.
President Peggy O’Neal will be front and square, as will chief executive Brendon Gale and coach Damien Hardwick.
It remains to be seen how many of the premiership 22 will be on the ground.
If players are found guilty in the courts over the distribution of the photograph of a near-naked woman wearing a 2017 premiership medal, there will be punishments.
Richmond knows it. The AFL knows it.
The first player to send the image will almost certainly face criminal charges, and it’s possible players who received the image and passed it on could also be charged.
There’s no reason the AFL integrity unit should not act independently and come over the top.
One AFL figure on Thursday suggested four weeks for the main man might be appropriate and the remainder on a sliding scale.
A $5000 fine for conduct unbecoming would be a wholly insufficient punishment and send a shocking message.
The police and courts will do their job, and the Tigers and league will have to act as a matter of principle.
If they don’t, the collective chest-thumping about respect and responsibility towards women would be revealed as nothing but grandstanding.
“We are committed to creating an environment where women can thrive and we are dedicated to promoting attitudes and behaviours that are respectful and supportive of women,” Richmond said in a statement this week.
The story went viral and moved quickly this week, but the footy world moved too slowly.
The woman’s family approached Richmond and the AFL in the days after the Grand Final, and then the police.
It took eight days — from when the photo was allegedly first distributed until O’Neal was questioned about it on the ABC on Monday night — for the story to gain real attention.
Were Richmond and the AFL on the slows?
Why did they not act sooner?
If members of the public were receiving this picture on the Monday after the Grand Final, surely Richmond and AFL staff were, too.
Some say the woman deserves no sympathy, that she was foolish to have allowed the photograph to be taken and ask, “What did she think was going to happen?”.
Incredibly, there is some sympathy for the player — boys being boys and she was up for the photograph in the first place.
People have to get with the program on this one.
In The Australian newspaper, former Western Bulldogs board member and patron of the women’s game Susan Alberti labelled the episode “disgusting”.
“It’s important that this isn’t just brushed aside. It’s not ‘ho hum’, it’s no laughing matter,” she said.
Take it as read, no one at Richmond or the AFL is laughing now.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/expert-opinion/mark-robinson/a-tough-response-needed-by-richmond-and-afl-in-picture-scandal-writes-mark-robinson/news-story/0b69faebb0ad8353bc369aba443f745e
-
That's pretty ironic coming from someone that told the AFL world he got a hardon when Erin Phillips kissed her partner. Floggo strikes again.
Time this Buffon was sent on holidays by his employees permanently
-
Don't you just hate fat, lagging dogs who judge from behind a bottle.
-
Don't you just hate fat, lagging dogs who judge from behind a bottle.
He's dumb as dog poo. No idea how he got where he has
-
Don't you just hate fat, lagging dogs who judge from behind a bottle.
He's dumb as dog pooe. No idea how he got where he has
He obviously has some photos.
-
I just can't fathom how god damn slow this police investigation is taking, by the time this incompetence is organised the press will have the perpertrator and half the side in the electric chair.
-
Slobbo would have been the first to beat his meat over the photo.
-
I just can't fathom how god damn slow this police investigation is taking, by the time this incompetence is organised the press will have the perpertrator and half the side in the eledctric chair.
Player involved is in Hong Kong.....
-
That's pretty ironic coming from someone that told the AFL world he got a hardon when Erin Phillips kissed her partner. Floggo strikes again.
Time this Buffon was sent on holidays by his employees permanently
Or who could forgot what he said about alex fasolo
stuff he makes me sick jabba
-
I just can't fathom how god damn slow this police investigation is taking, by the time this incompetence is organised the press will have the perpertrator and half the side in the eledctric chair.
Player involved is in Hong Kong.....
Yep majority of players are in Hong Kong.
Remember cops want to check at least 7 phones.
-
Slobbo would have been the first to beat his meat over the photo.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XiSDvlVOkwc/hqdefault.jpg)
-
Rita Panahi on Richmond revenge porn: AFL’s hypocrisy exposed
Rita Panahi,
Herald Sun
16 October 2017
HUMILIATING a young woman by circulating a topless image of her without consent is shameful behaviour no matter the circumstances, but the offence is even more egregious if committed by a professional footballer.
Unlike the average millennial, every single player in the AFL is taught about cyber safety and the dangers of transmitting questionable material electronically, whether it’s sexting, texting or social media posts.
If they choose to ignore all the warnings and behave like self-indulgent flogs, then they’ll have to face the consequences, whether it’s a fine, a club or AFL-imposed suspension or criminal charges.
The foul stench of hypocrisy makes every offence more egregious, and Richmond — along with the AFL — has a history of virtue signalling on a range of social and political issues including respect for women.
The premiership medal scandal has revealed a layer of hypocrisy within Richmond and the AFL. Picture: Greg Ford/AFL Media
Yet when one of their own is suspected of behaviour that is not only unconscionable but possibly criminal, they go missing, uttering weasel words. More on that later.
The young lady at the centre of the controversy, who is said to be deeply traumatised by her image going viral, has been firstly victimised and then blamed for her own victimisation.
Listening to Melbourne radio last week, it was evident that it wasn’t just blinkered footy fans who were dismissive of the injured party in this grubby affair.
Seasoned talkback hosts who should know better seemed to think the woman gave up her rights when she posed for the photo, never mind that, according to Victoria Police, “the image was posted without consent”.
This is what listeners heard on 3AW:
Darren James: That girl, she would’ve volunteered for that, wouldn’t she?
Tony Moclair: Yes, she would have.
James: You can’t see her face. She wasn’t being tied up.
Moclair: No, she wasn’t but the police are involved now, Darren, because the police have nothing else to do, there’s no home invasions or anything … but they’re on the case.
The tone was somewhere between derision and contempt. Perhaps the two normally sensible hosts were not aware of just how distressed the alleged victim was or that sharing invasive images without consent is a criminal offence.
Australia’s pre-eminent cyber security expert, Susan McLean, is highly critical of Richmond’s response, labelling it “appalling.”
On the ABC’s Q&A program last Monday night, Richmond president Peggy O’Neal said: “If it turns out that it is disrespectful to women, we certainly don’t stand for that, that’s not what our club’s about and if someone has made a disrespectful and humiliating gesture then of course it will be taken into account.”
Ms McLean, a former veteran cop, is disappointed that the AFL’s only female club president did not strongly condemn the intimate image abuse.
“How can it not be disrespectful? I found that comment to be disgusting,” Ms McLean said. “The club has got to be mindful that there is a police investigation but that doesn’t stop them from making a general statement that image-based abuse is abhorrent, disrespectful and illegal.”
The cyber cop has worked extensively with AFL clubs and believes they can’t just “take a stand when it suits” and must be consistent in their response to the treatment of women.
“Richmond is one of the four clubs I haven’t worked with,” Ms McLean said.
“This for me is not a technology issue, it is a respect issue. The technology is a conduit for the act. That act shows the calibre of the individual. It’s not a joke, it’s not harmless fun. It’s disrespectful and illegal.”
It’s also widespread. A survey of 4200 people by RMIT University showed that one in five was a victim of “image-based abuse”, with the most common type of abuse the taking of sexual/nude pictures without consent followed by distributing pictures without consent or threatening to distribute.
The behaviour is often labelled “revenge porn” but “revenge” isn’t necessarily a factor.
“Image-based abuse has emerged so rapidly as an issue that inevitably our laws and policies are struggling to catch up,” RMIT University’s Dr Nicola Henry said.
“This isn’t just about ‘revenge porn’ — images are being used to control, abuse and humiliate people in ways that go well beyond the ‘relationship gone sour’ scenario.”
When Ms Neal was asked on Q&A about the infamous image, she claimed to have only recently heard of the saga.
“I’m just not across the facts … It’s just been brought to my attention very recently within the last few hours but I understand that something’s going on,” she said before speaking about the AFL’s values of equality and inclusiveness.
But how can that be when the photo was being circulated among football circles for over a week and on the Friday before she appeared on Q&A, an edited version was published on 3AW’s website and shared extensively on social media.
Behind the scenes a senior Tigers official was in contact with the radio station regarding the image and accompanying story.
Meanwhile, the young woman’s distraught family had been in contact with the club.
How can the president be ignorant of the photo for a further three days after mainstream media coverage of its existence?
It’s easy to take a stand on fashionable causes but if football is to eliminate its “women’s issues” then it must care less about brand management and more about victims.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/rita-panahi/richmond-afl-exposed-for-hypocrisy-in-revenge-porn-scandal/news-story/dbbeb54f073aecee8c31c530b6ce6f02
-
Emma Freedman questions Peter FitzSimons on Channel 9
Herald-Sun
16 October 2017
EMMA Freedman awkwardly paused before sharing her views on Richmond’s nude photo scandal.
It was the calm before the storm.
Freedman declared on Channel 9’s Sports Sunday that the entire leaked picture scandal would never have happened if the woman involved had simply kept her clothes on.
Her forthright views were angrily challenged by Wide World of Sports commentator Peter FitzSimons, who appeared to accuse Freedman of victim shaming.
The woman involved in the photos which have been circulated widely since Richmond’s premiership win over Adelaide at the MCG, has made a formal complaint to police after reportedly approaching the Tigers about the use of pictures taken of her.
The photos are now the subject of a police investigation.
The Herald Sun has reported a senior AFL figure has already touted the idea of a four match suspension for any player found to have been involved in the circulation of the images.
FitzSimons on Sunday said the AFL already has enough information to suspend any Richmond player involved.
“The AFL has to take a stand on this and say we are not doing this anymore,” he said.
“We have a sad history of mistreating women and we’re not doing it any more.”
Freedman’s views were very different.
“My opinion on it, Peter, is, don’t take your clothes off, to be honest,” Freedman said.
FitzSimons responded: “Oh, so it’s her fault?”
The Triple M breakfast host then refuted FitzSimons accusation.
“If you’re in a position where you think you might be put in a vulnerable position later on, for me, I wouldn’t take my clothes off,” she said.
Former Swans’ premiership champion Tadhg Kennelly said any player found to be involved should not be suspended and said counselling was the best way to respond to the actions of any Richmond player found to have been involved.
“It’s not a great look, but I don’t agree with suspending the young man involved,” he said.
“There’s two people involved in this situation. I agree totally with Emma. Why put yourself in a position like that as a female.”
Freedman clarified her comments with an extensive explanation on her Twitter account.
She said she has been abused on social media and feels “very sorry” for the woman at the centre of the scandal.
“I consider myself a feminist,” Freedman wrote.
“But I also take into consideration, in this modern day and age, the vulnerable position of women.
“I agree the player who distributed the photo unlawfully should be held accountable. It is of course illegal to distribute a photograph without consent!
“But women (and men) are taken advantage of all the time, especially in situations involving alcohol (there’s little doubt that was involved in some capacity in the taking of this photo, in the midst of celebrations).
“Consenting and choosing to take part in a photograph, such as the one that was distributed, is dangerous. I’m not saying it’s wrong or bad. I’m saying it’s dangerous. I would love for us to live in a world where people keep their promises and do the right thing. They often don’t.
“I feel very sorry for the woman involved. It’s humiliating for her, But the taking of that photograph, put her in a vulnerable position. How can we absolutely trust someone will delete a photograph? We can’t. As we’ve seen over the last week.
“Maybe I’m overly careful and very distrusting of others, possibly to my fault. You may not agree with me, but hopefully you can understand.
“Let’s hope that in the future we can all be free to engage in things like this.”
Freedman also received criticism from Channel 9 viewers on social media for questioning how Richmond might need to respond differently if superstar Dustin Martin is found to be involved.
Freedman was also praised by many commentators for her views.
The Tigers released a statement last week claiming the club will cooperate fully with Victoria Police’s investigation into the photos being circulated.
“At the Richmond Football Club we feel very strongly about the positive role of women at our club and in sport generally,” The club said in a statement.
“We are committed to creating an environment where women can thrive and we are dedicated to promoting attitudes and behaviours that are respectful and supportive of women.”
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/emma-freedman-questions-peter-fitzsimons-over-richmond-photo-scandal/news-story/60ceef6968f9c9b6a706c98702e2d1c3
-
Yeah Emma
GAGF Rita you stuffen ugly cow
-
Stupid people the lot of them
The female dropkick for allowing the photo to be taken.
The male/female dropkick for taking the photo.
The male/female dropkick who shared the photo.
Did someone do something illegal? Probably.
Is it a hanging offence? Probably not.
:cheers
-
LMAO
Revenge Porn
What a crack up
-
What worries me is the media frenzy and hype.
One day they are going to go too far and some poor kid could end up losing his career, get depressed or even commit suicide.
I believe a balanced approach of counselling, mediation and education is called for the media just need to back off.
It may not even been the player involved who fwded the pic.
Surely one lapse of judgement, probably even alcohol induced, does not warrant such high levels of scrutiny.
Let the police deal with it and put the electric chair back in the attic.
-
The "revenge porn" stuff is surely bs. But if he did distribute it without her consent then it was a dumb move and he could be in strife. There have been enough news stories about this stuff over the last couple of years to know that this is a slippery slope. Hope it just blows over soon.
-
The "revenge porn" stuff is surely bs. But if he did distribute it without her consent then it was a dumb move and he could be in strife. There have been enough news stories about this stuff over the last couple of years to know that this is a slippery slope. Hope it just blows over soon.
Unfortunately legally it falls under the revenge porn category although it is far from that in real terms.
There's a lot we don't know about the incident so it's dangerous to go off half 🐓.
We should all wait and see what the police do after they have interviewed all involved. We should all know that from chopstickgate.
-
if it was done out of spite he is in trouble. Porn is a bit of a stretch, t@s out is not 'porn'.
-
is it just me or are things arse about?
Guy takes a consentual picture of a girls baps (no face) and sends them - crucified in the media and guilty without trial, threats for his job and calls for him to be thrown in jail for up to 7 years.
Meanwhile - 1 in 5 convicted rapists in Victoria recieve no jail time (suspended sentence) or a bond without conviction
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/opinion-rapists-are-getting-too-little-jail-time/news-story/e7880be7dd6cbf26cddcd668455bbeda
the latter doesnt justify the former but who really needs jail time to protect the greater population and who is more likely to be rehabilitated at the end of their punishment?
-
HUMILIATING a young woman by circulating a topless image of her without consent is shameful behaviour no matter the circumstances, but the offence is even more egregious if committed by a professional footballer.
Please explain how though? Why should they be held more responsible than anyone else? What a farce. Someone should remind this bitch what happened with the Dusty chopsticks saga when everyone commented before the facts came out and he was cleared. Imbeciles in the media just don't learn
-
The female dropkick for allowing the photo to be taken.
Did you just assume the photographee's gender?
-
The female dropkick for allowing the photo to be taken.
Did you just assume the photographee's gender?
Are there doubts? Not from what I have heard. :whistle
-
is it just me or are things arse about?
Guy takes a consentual picture of a girls baps (no face) and sends them - crucified in the media and guilty without trial, threats for his job and calls for him to be thrown in jail for up to 7 years.
Meanwhile - 1 in 5 convicted rapists in Victoria recieve no jail time (suspended sentence) or a bond without conviction
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/opinion-rapists-are-getting-too-little-jail-time/news-story/e7880be7dd6cbf26cddcd668455bbeda
the latter doesnt justify the former but who really needs jail time to protect the greater population and who is more likely to be rehabilitated at the end of their punishment?
To get an accurate picture on sentencing practices regarding rape a far more accurate and more reliable source of information can be found at the sentencing council website. According to the sentencing council in 2013–14, 94% of people
sentenced (44 of 47) found guilty of rape were given an immediate custodial sentence. Furthermore suspended sentences have been abolished.
http://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sacstat/higher_courts/HC_6231_38_1.html
-
The female dropkick for allowing the photo to be taken.
Did you just assume the photographee's gender?
Are there doubts? Not from what I have heard. :whistle
She may have boobs but we don't know what she feels she is :banghead
-
The female dropkick for allowing the photo to be taken.
Did you just assume the photographee's gender?
Are there doubts? Not from what I have heard. :whistle
She may have boobs but we don't know what she feels she is :banghead
"Ze may have boobs but we don't know what ze feels ze is"
Now the pc (without assumption) way to appease the gender neutral and non binary persons. :rollin
-
:lol
-
Tiger player involved in nude photo scandal identified
ALEKS DEVIC,
Herald Sun
18 October 2017 8:50pm
POLICE have identified the Richmond Tigers footballer at the centre of the topless Premiership medal photo scandal.
The investigation has entered its second week and police are assessing the information they have.
As part of the evidence hunt, the phones of some Richmond players could be seized to determine how many times the leaked photo of the barebreasted female, draped with a Premiership medal around her neck was forwarded on.
Police would not comment on any developments except to say: “The investigation is ongoing.”
The woman says she is a victim of revenge porn after the player who took the photo told her the picture was deleted off his phone.
She had consented to the photo being taken but did not give any permission for it to be sent on.
The player is alleged to have sent it to various people, including Richmond teammates.
The incident has left the woman highly distressed.
As part of the police probe, social media giants Whatsapp, Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook could be issued warrants to cough up information as to who was sending the photo. on their platform.
Richmond Football Club has said it would work with police during the investigation and wanted to ensure it had a club environment where women could thrive.
The AFL Integrity Unit is also investigating and has been in communication with the female.
Under the sexting laws, people can be charged if intimate images were sent out without the person’s consent.
Penalties range from warnings to two years jail.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/tiger-player-involved-in-nude-photo-scandal-identified/news-story/a499d10065e79bd50092a92ebfbda091
-
Wow, what a breakthrough.
I guess they just asked the girl who it was.
-
But still not named
-
Still always find the term AFL Integrity Unit a bit of an oxymoron.... :whistle
-
Not a hope in hell of pulling that poo off.
Get a decent lawyer boys and you'll be fine.
-
We all know who it was.
You would think the amount of money being spent on this is disproportionate to the event. Not that I am condoning it but can't we all come to a hush hush $ agreement and move on.
It has happening it was done.
What, are we going to have half the team banned next year ala Essendon?
LMAO. Why would half the team get banned? Knowbody knows the full story so why pretend you do?
-
We all know who it was.
You would think the amount of money being spent on this is disproportionate to the event. Not that I am condoning it but can't we all come to a hush hush $ agreement and move on.
It has happening it was done.
What, are we going to have half the team banned next year ala Essendon?
LMAO. Why would half the team get banned? Knowbody knows the full story so why pretend you do?
It was a tongue in cheek post, I heard from a homeless bloke who it was, passed no comment and would not mention the name but have heard it from several sources, at the end of the day I don't care and do not purport to know the full story.
-
You'd think being in Hong Kong they'd all just buy new phones and say it never happened lol
-
You'd think being in Hong Kong they'd all just buy new phones and say it never happened lol
Or second hand phones of the same model. Then just transfer all files bar that photo and text....
-
I wuz hacked by ALF
-
You'd think being in Hong Kong they'd all just buy new phones and say it never happened lol
Or such and such was minding our phones in a bag and accidentally dropped it in the pool.
-
You'd think being in Hong Kong they'd all just buy new phones and say it never happened lol
Or such and such was minding our phones in a bag and accidentally dropped it in the pool.
:clapping give this guy a medal
-
You'd think being in Hong Kong they'd all just buy new phones and say it never happened lol
Or such and such was minding our phones in a bag and accidentally dropped it in the pool.
:clapping give this guy a medal
I consent to a photo being taken and to be sent around of the medal medal hanging around my manboobs.
-
And now for some contrast of when a male gets his pic taken and spread under similar circumstances
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/st-kilda-great-nick-riewoldt-shares-the-highs-and-lows-of-his-career/news-story/382174d9a925438a501cef5d164b89d0
"It’s not as though I was naked in a photo with another girl, or engaging in something I shouldn’t have been, cheating on my partner, doing drugs, or whatever. I was just standing there, naked. Big deal."
-
:thumbsup beat me to it dooks.
-
what happened to the rest of the comments?
they didnt speculate or break site rules did they?
-
Reality hurts some
-
what happened to the rest of the comments?
they didnt speculate or break site rules did they?
My comments weren't speculation, disappointing they were taken down - actually ridiculous
Reality hurts some
yep
-
well, what can one say.
inherently disappointing.
-
what happened to the rest of the comments?
they didnt speculate or break site rules did they?
That you have to ask is a concern, would have thought it was relatively easy to work out :huh3
It was the language, pretty simple really. Granted we are fairly lenient with the swearing on this site but it isnt a free for all with regard to swearing and offensive comments
And one comment was over the top. Point could have been made without the Vitriolic abusive, sexist wording
All the comments after that quoting the original post we removed. And please dodnt say thats not fair, we've always done that, nothing new here
As for being hurt? Nope just trying to show some respect to ALL posters.
-
Clementine Powell..... :clapping
-
I feel there's only certain words available for describing certain people and situations.
That and the truth.
-
I feel there's only certain words available for describing certain people and situations.
That and the truth.
Now darling you know i am advocate of the truth
I applaud it, always have
But points can be made without resorting to gutter abuse
-
BREAKING:- INVESTIGATION OVER AT THE REQUEST OF THE SAID WOMAN.
reported by Ch7 news ans SEN1116
Hilarious :lol
Proves everything we have been saying :ROTFL
Shame on the media and those who towed their line :thatsgold
-
Seven news report: https://twitter.com/7NewsMelbourne/status/922721098655059968
-
Richmond topless photo probe closed by Victoria Police
Kate McMahon,
Herald Sun
24 October 2017 6:00pm
POLICE have closed their investigation of a Richmond player who circulated a photo of a young woman wearing his AFL Premiership medal.
A Victoria Police spokesman confirmed the case had been closed at the request of the woman on Tuesday afternoon.
The woman had claimed she was a victim of revenge porn after the images of her topless were widely circulated online and through text messages without her permission or knowledge.
The photo went viral in the wake of the Tiger’s miraculous premiership win.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/richmond-topless-photo-probe-closed-by-victoria-police/news-story/8550dfec1414ab7a7d8a474c297f9b63
-
I feel there's only certain words available for describing certain people and situations.
That and the truth.
Now darling you know i am advocate of the truth
I applaud it, always have
But points can be made without resorting to gutter abuse
Yes, but with respect WP, if you applaud the truth, then defend someone who conducts themselves from the moral gutter of society, in the face of someone calling them out, how does that look to a reasonable person?
-
Inb4 nothing happens.
-
I love when truth wins
-
Think I made a few enemies with my comments elsewhere, once again I won
Wasn't about that, but screw these lefties
-
Inb4 nothing happens.
Called early called well :clapping
-
So will Susie O'Brien now accept she was completely out of line and either resign or be sacked if she doesn't?
I doubt it. Yet she wanted the player responsible sacked. The double standards run deep with this one.
-
Victims like that really make it hard to totally hate the perp.
-
Victims like that really make it hard to totally hate the perp.
"victims" :snidegrin
-
My thoughts
No indentity , No case
It could be one of 12 million people 🤔
-
Will be interesting to see what happens now
What will the AFL do?
Wouldn't be popping champagne just yet
Cop investigation might be over
Doesn't mean the AFL wont do something so they are seen to be doing something
It is the AFL way.
Heard Ch7 reporter Emily Angwin on SEN driving home tonight she was asked if she knew if there had been some sort of financial settlement between player / club / AFL and woman. She said they were still trying to establish that
-
Without prejudice
Nice try darls
And Jack site rules still apply :banghead
Dont speculate or post rumpurs youve heard, that includes what she may or may not do for a living
-
My thoughts
No indentity , No case
It could be one of 12 million people 🤔
11,999,999 to be presise as my wife can be eliminated as a suspect.
-
11,999,999 to be presise as my wife can be eliminated as a suspect.
Same issue here.
11,999,998 and counting
-
11,999,999 to be presise as my wife can be eliminated as a suspect.
Same issue here.
11,999,998 and counting
11,999,997
-
Don't you just hate fat, lagging dogs who judge from behind a bottle.
He's dumb as dog pooe. No idea how he got where he has
So Floggo was wrong again. That would be newsworthy if it wasn't the case everytime he opens his stuffen mouth
-
Richmond Tigers topless photo investigation closed by Victoria Police
By WWOS staff
24 October 2017
The woman at the centre of the topless Richmond premiership photo scandal has told police to drop the investigation but still maintains she was betrayed by the player in question.
The woman's lawyers, Maurice Blackburn, told the Herald Sun their client still believed she was wronged.
“Our client maintains that her trust and privacy has been breached by the unauthorised distribution of the photo," the law firm told the newspaper.
“Her welfare is our main priority, as is restoring her privacy, so we do not wish to cause her any more distress by commenting further.”
The woman alleged she was the victim of revenge porn after a topless image of her wearing the premiership medal circulated online and via text messages without her permission or knowledge.
A Victoria Police spokeswoman told News Corp the case had been closed.
“At the request of the complainant the investigation into the circulation of intimate images has ceased.
“This current development does not preclude the investigators from reopening the investigation at a later date.”
The unidentified player may still face a penalty from the club as the Tigers continue to investigate the matter internally.
Club spokeswoman Nicki Malady refused to comment on the police investigation when contacted by the Herald Sun but said an internal review was ongoing.
“We can’t reveal anything at this stage. It is still all continuing,” she said.
The premiership player could have faced two years in prison if charged under “sexting” laws which consists of adults who send intimate images without the other person’s consent.
https://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/10/24/20/21/richmond-topless-photo-investigation-closed-by-victoria-police
-
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha chop sticks mark 2
and the usuals were ready to pounce yet again, but learnt their lesson like last time.
what a crock of poo.
-
11,999,996
Not my Mrs 😜
-
Richmond Tigers topless photo investigation closed by Victoria Police
By WWOS staff
24 October 2017
The woman at the centre of the topless Richmond premiership photo scandal has told police to drop the investigation but still maintains she was betrayed by the player in question.
The woman's lawyers, Maurice Blackburn, told the Herald Sun their client still believed she was wronged.
“Our client maintains that her trust and privacy has been breached by the unauthorised distribution of the photo," the law firm told the newspaper.
“Her welfare is our main priority, as is restoring her privacy, so we do not wish to cause her any more distress by commenting further.”
The woman alleged she was the victim of revenge porn after a topless image of her wearing the premiership medal circulated online and via text messages without her permission or knowledge.
A Victoria Police spokeswoman told News Corp the case had been closed.
“At the request of the complainant the investigation into the circulation of intimate images has ceased.
“This current development does not preclude the investigators from reopening the investigation at a later date.”
The unidentified player may still face a penalty from the club as the Tigers continue to investigate the matter internally.
Club spokeswoman Nicki Malady refused to comment on the police investigation when contacted by the Herald Sun but said an internal review was ongoing.
“We can’t reveal anything at this stage. It is still all continuing,” she said.
The premiership player could have faced two years in prison if charged under “sexting” laws which consists of adults who send intimate images without the other person’s consent.
https://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/10/24/20/21/richmond-topless-photo-investigation-closed-by-victoria-police
A brown paper bag solves a lot of wrongs!
-
Inb4 nothing happens.
gold!!!
Though we knew nothing would happen right. Typical of the blobbo and suzie obriens of this world trying to stay relevant in the off season
-
Not my missus but not ruling myself out.
-
11,999,996
Not my Mrs 😜
Close
And no pictures :shh
-
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha chop sticks mark 2
and the usuals were ready to pounce yet again, but learnt their lesson like last time.
what a crock of poo.
I'd say they learnt nothing last time and it's a fair bet they won't have this time either... :shh
-
I wonder what it will be next year.
-
“At the request of the complainant the investigation into the circulation of intimate images has ceased.
“This current development does not preclude the investigators from reopening the investigation at a later date.”
It appears the complainant has done a statement of no complaint. As the offence is a summary offence and not an indictable offence there is a time limit with regards to laying charges. Usually(although there are some exceptions) with a summary offence the police have 12 months to lay charges from the date of the incident otherwise they are statute barred from pursuing charges.
-
No wonder people can't stand journos when you have flogs like obrien and blobbo jumping to their usual conclusions
Not to mention the usual "I want to stay relevant peaces" by Caro And Rita
It must eat a lot of people up inside to see this story disappear like a fart in the wind.
-
Will be interesting to see what happens now
What will the AFL do?
Wouldn't be popping champagne just yet
Cop investigation might be over
Doesn't mean the AFL wont do something so they are seen to be doing something
It is the AFL way.
Heard Ch7 reporter Emily Angwin on SEN driving home tonight she was asked if she knew if there had been some sort of financial settlement between player / club / AFL and woman. She said they were still trying to establish that
Said the above last night
Still think folks should hold their collective horses a bit - this isn't over, one part of it is but....
The AFL being the AFL still might do something or force the RFC to do something, as I said it is their way
I don't think they can do anything without naming the player involved, and don't think they should but doesn't mean they wont...
Everyone keeps comparing this to "chopstick gate" and what seems to get forgotten in that comparison is that although the police did nothing, the Club via the AFL did still "fine" Dusty. Same still could happen here
-
It's exactly like the chop sticks saga
Everyone out for blood and once again were left looking like fools.
If it's a fine by the club it would be to shut the AFL community up, not because they think the boy is guilty
-
It's exactly like the chop sticks saga
Everyone out for blood and once again were left looking like fools.
If it's a fine by the club it would be to shut the AFL community up, not because they think the boy is guilty
Difference is that there was no real evidence that Dusty did what he was accused of doing.
In this case, there was both exhibit A and B
-
No wonder people can't stand journos when you have flogs like obrien and blobbo jumping to their usual conclusions
Not to mention the usual "I want to stay relevant peaces" by Caro And Rita
It must eat a lot of people up inside to see this story disappear like a fart in the wind.
This
-
Well well well
Listening to SEN driving in this morning they said that even though the Police investigation is currently closed the AFL & RFC are still reviewing / investigating this
So clearly it isn't over
-
Well well well
Listening to SEN driving in this morning they said that even though the Police investigation is currently closed the AFL & RFC are still reviewing / investigating this
So clearly it isn't over
no police investigation means its over.
You can jump up and down with suzie o and the rest of the lunatics, but if a fine or suspension is given its only to appease the corrupt bodies involved here.
-
no police investigation means its over.
You can jump up and down with suzie o and the rest of the lunatics, but if a fine or suspension is given its only to appease the corrupt bodies involved here.
Fair dinkum I wish you'd take the time to read everything before you jump and down and call me a lunatic
Earlier this morning I posted this
Will be interesting to see what happens now
What will the AFL do?
Wouldn't be popping champagne just yet
Cop investigation might be over
Doesn't mean the AFL wont do something so they are seen to be doing something
It is the AFL way.
Heard Ch7 reporter Emily Angwin on SEN driving home tonight she was asked if she knew if there had been some sort of financial settlement between player / club / AFL and woman. She said they were still trying to establish that
Said the above last night
Still think folks should hold their collective horses a bit - this isn't over, one part of it is but....
The AFL being the AFL still might do something or force the RFC to do something, as I said it is their way
I don't think they can do anything without naming the player involved, and don't think they should but doesn't mean they wont...
Everyone keeps comparing this to "chopstick gate" and what seems to get forgotten in that comparison is that although the police did nothing, the Club via the AFL did still "fine" Dusty. Same still could happen here
Did you bother to read it? Any part of it not clear enough for you? I actually said "I don't think they can do anything without naming the player involved, and don't think they should but doesn't mean they wont...
So please tell me how that's jumping up and down and joining the so called "lunatics"
As I said the cop investigation might have dropped their investigation for now. Read their press statement it clearly states the woman doesn't want to proceed but they also clearly states it can be re-opened...
the only reason the cops have stopped their investigations is because the woman for reason's only she can explain and clearly wont explain instigated it
Further to that I also said it will be interesting to see what the AFL does now because in their world they have to be seen to be doing something....
Whether we like it or not, agree with it or not the police investigation and the AFL investigation are now 2 separate issues and that's what is at play now
So the AFL can if they chose to act and punish the player under some rule they will change the meaning of to suit their purpose, again like it or not agree with it or not because that's what (as history tells us) they do
-
If someone has allegedly committed a criminal offence, do the police really need the victims permission to stop or continue the investigation?
Maybe some of the more legal types can help me here.
-
If someone has allegedly committed a criminal offence, do the police really need the victims permission to stop or continue the investigation?
Maybe some of the more legal types can help me here.
I hope this is of some assistance. Usually for a person to be charged with a criminal offence a complainant needs to make a statement to the Police about the accused's alleged criminal conduct. However this is not always the case for example in some cases provided the accused has made admissions to committing a criminal offence the Police do not have to rely on a statement from the complainant to make out the offence. If the accused has made no admissions to committing an offence and the police have a statement of no complaint from the complainant and there is no other evidence to corroborate the commission of an offence eg CCTV footage then the Police will not pursue charges for lack of evidence. Police can and often do to take into account the wishes of a complainant when deciding whether to pursue charges against an accused particularly in relation to alleged sex crimes. Having said that police commonly pursue charges in family violence cases even when the complainant has refused to make a statement or wishes for no charges to be laid.
-
Well well well
Listening to SEN driving in this morning they said that even though the Police investigation is currently closed the AFL & RFC are still reviewing / investigating this
So clearly it isn't over
technically its not over but with the police investigation closed (the most serious investigation), this train has run out of coal and is gliding silently to an imminent halt.
you know it. i know it. even the media with their stunning absence of opinion pieces knows it.
in the the absence of a conviction (let alone a complaint to the police) and to keep identites anonymous, the most that will feasibly happen is a fine. if that. And if a fine happens it will be to manage perceptions rather than anything else.
-
Essendon great Tim Watson and top lawyer Nick Pappas call for Richmond and AFL to hand down sanctions to premiership Tiger
October 25, 2017 10:04am
Ben Waterworth
FOX SPORTS
RICHMOND has “fiercely denied” questions that the woman involved in the circulated topless premiership medal photo was paid before telling police that she would drop her complaint, according to 3AW broadcaster Neil Mitchell.
Mitchell said he had put the question directly to the Tigers on Wednesday morning.
“My question: Was money paid? Did the Richmond Football Club, a player or a supporter, pay the girl to drop the action?” Mitchell asked on 3AW.
“I’ve asked that question of her lawyers and the club as well. Only a short while ago, the club fiercely denied any money was paid — although how they’d know whether a supporter did it is questionable. But they say the club and the player did not compensate her.”
The Tigers’ denial comes after an AFL great and top lawyer called for sanctions against the Richmond player involved.
At the request of the complainant, Victoria Police on Tuesday night ceased its investigation into the intimate images of a topless woman wearing a premiership medal, but reiterated that it could be reopened at a later date.
Police had earlier identified the Richmond player who took the photo, which was sent out on social media after the Tigers’ premiership win on September 30.
Essendon legend Tim Watson believes it is now “incumbent” on both Richmond and the AFL to discipline the Tigers player involved in the circulation of the photo.
“I can completely understand how the girl in this story doesn’t want to go any further because she would understand completely and utterly the publicity that would surround this,” Watson said on SEN Breakfast.
“At some point, her identity would be revealed and it becomes a greater story and a greater concern for her.
“The girl still maintains that her trust and her privacy have been breached by the unauthorised distribution of the photo, therefore I would think it is incumbent on the AFL and Richmond to have some form of punishment attached to all this if they are fair dinkum about this whole idea of respect and responsibility for women.”
On Tuesday night, a spokesperson for Maurice Blackburn Lawyers — the firm representing the woman — told the Herald Sun that she “maintains that her trust and privacy has been breached by the unauthorised distribution of the photo”.
Nick Pappas QC, who was appointed the Chief Magistrate of Victoria at the age of 35, said police could continue its formal investigation even if the woman no longer wanted to be part of it.
“Any sort of offence where the police have been given some sort of information, including where there’s a complainant who’s made a statement, such as in this case — presumably she’s made a statement — is sufficient to permit the police to continue their investigation and, indeed, the prosecutor,” Mr Pappas told 3AW.
“They’d certainly take into account her wishes, bearing in mind they’ve spent arguably a week or two investigating it, taking statements, there’s been public resources and public interest in the matter. So the views of the complainant, in this case, are only one of the factors have been taken into account.
“A couple of the others, though, are strength of the case, the likelihood of conviction, the amount resources that have been expended already, the very question of the message to the community — there are a number of issues.”
But Mr Pappas agreed that the AFL must get involved in the matter now.
“This is a question of public standards and morality and very much the question of how the men of our game deal with the young women of the game, who associate with them, and respect and equality and proper treatment of individuals who are bigger than the game, with all due respect to the game,” Mr Pappas said.
“These things seem to happen a bit, the AFL purports to be setting moral and community standards and to distribute an image without consent is clearly not acceptable.”
Mitchell said the case was “too important” to let the player go unpunished.
“This is an important message to every young idiot — footballer or not — that women in this situation should be treated decently. This case had enormous potential to spread the message on cyber safety and privacy,” Mitchell told 3AW.
“The women’s privacy must be maintained here, but the case shouldn’t stop here, the case shouldn’t rest here.”
Earlier this month, Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale said his club wanted to help police get to the bottom of the incident.
“This club feels very strongly about creating an environment where women can thrive and this club feels very strongly about promoting attitudes and behaviours that are respectful of and supportive of women,” he said.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/essendon-great-and-top-lawyer-call-for-richmond-and-afl-to-hand-down-sanctions-to-premiership-tiger/news-story/398d9f6e8d401347251c4d03a19d8c3b
-
Flogs are still making assumptions....
...hypocrite Watson's never quite got over his Tigers old man telling him before his debut against Richmond all those years ago that if the match is close to "remember who this family barracks for"... :shh
-
Maybe they did a deal with the girl to have her photo on all the 2018 membership cards? :lol
-
:lol
-
Inb4 nothing happens.
Called early called well :clapping
Clearly the first to say it too :clapping
-
Maybe they did a deal with the girl to have her photo on all the 2018 membership cards? :lol
And to appear at a coterie function or two.
-
Yes, would no doubt go down a treat with the hardly prudes.... :shh
-
Well well well
Listening to SEN driving in this morning they said that even though the Police investigation is currently closed the AFL & RFC are still reviewing / investigating this
So clearly it isn't over
technically its not over but with the police investigation closed (the most serious investigation), this train has run out of coal and is gliding silently to an imminent halt.
you know it. i know it. even the media with their stunning absence of opinion pieces knows it.
in the the absence of a conviction (let alone a complaint to the police) and to keep identites anonymous, the most that will feasibly happen is a fine. if that. And if a fine happens it will be to manage perceptions rather than anything else.
Why bother Dooks
The usuals will hang off every word of this AFL integrity unit
Whatever penalty is given is to appease the femi whinges and afl
-
Reckon something will happen rather quickly actually
Like it or not
As i said but certain people seem to ignore, dont think anything should but got no doubt something will
AFL needs to seen to be doing something
Stupidity is no defence to the AFL
-
inb4 nothing happens again.
-
AFL launches probe into topless photo scandal
Nathan Schmook
afl.com.au
October 25, 2017 5:55 PM
THE AFL Integrity Unit has taken up an investigation into the Richmond premiership photo scandal after Victoria Police closed its inquiry on Tuesday.
The League was informed on Wednesday that the police investigation had been closed at the request of the alleged victim, who was photographed topless wearing a 2017 premiership medal.
The photograph was circulated without her permission in the days following Richmond's Grand Final triumph and appeared on social media.
"This afternoon the AFL was contacted by Victoria Police, confirming their investigation had ceased," AFL spokesperson Jay Allen said in a statement.
"The AFL integrity unit are now investigating the matter.
"We will be in a position to make further comment when the Integrity Unit's investigation is complete.
"We ask to please respect the privacy of those involved."
The AFL does not conduct its own investigations while police inquiries are ongoing, but will now take up its own probe into the matter.
Richmond is also looking into the incident, while the police investigation could be re-opened at any point.
The police investigation was closed at the request of the woman, who had complained that she did not consent to the image being shared.
If the police investigation continued and the player involved was found guilty, he could have been charged under the 2014 'sexting laws', which has a maximum penalty of two years in jail.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-25/afl-launches-probe-into-topless-photo-scandal
-
So the afl is now a judicial body taking the stance of moral police of Victoria??
Patrick Smith the flogger will be jealous
WALOS
-
yep. WALOS
-
Be nice if they did a proper investigations in the scandals in house like we seen last couple of months.They pick and choose and cause media on there back.In all honesty it was a police matter case closed.
-
So the afl is now a judicial body taking the stance of moral police of Victoria??
Patrick Smith the flogger will be jealous
WALOS
So if the "complainant" has dropped charges and a crime has not been committed why should they sanction anyone. AFL should not have a say in what now is a private matter. I dont give a toss what they think. It is NOT their call.
I happen to know that it wasn't a player that sent the first image.
-
AFL launches probe into topless photo scandal
Nathan Schmook
afl.com.au
October 25, 2017 5:55 PM
THE AFL Integrity Unit has taken up an investigation into the Richmond premiership photo scandal after Victoria Police closed its inquiry on Tuesday.
The League was informed on Wednesday that the police investigation had been closed at the request of the alleged victim, who was photographed topless wearing a 2017 premiership medal.
The photograph was circulated without her permission in the days following Richmond's Grand Final triumph and appeared on social media.
"This afternoon the AFL was contacted by Victoria Police, confirming their investigation had ceased," AFL spokesperson Jay Allen said in a statement.
"The AFL integrity unit are now investigating the matter.
"We will be in a position to make further comment when the Integrity Unit's investigation is complete.
"We ask to please respect the privacy of those involved."
The AFL does not conduct its own investigations while police inquiries are ongoing, but will now take up its own probe into the matter.
Richmond is also looking into the incident, while the police investigation could be re-opened at any point.
The police investigation was closed at the request of the woman, who had complained that she did not consent to the image being shared.
If the police investigation continued and the player involved was found guilty, he could have been charged under the 2014 'sexting laws', which has a maximum penalty of two years in jail.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-25/afl-launches-probe-into-topless-photo-scandal
Cool the integrity team must have some spare time now the AFL adulterers are gone and Gold Coast got gifted pick 19 via the Cats.
Flogs should spend some more time looking around their own backyard than over our fence
-
Premiers
-
I suspect there is still a lot that has not come out in relation to this, but given that the girl has asked the investigation be dropped and that she had engaged Maurice and Blackburn to represent her, something just doesn't seem right. I am definitely in the cynic camp on the validity of the accusation but it is only based on assumption, not fact.
The thing is, the Police dropping their investigation has given both the AFL and Richmond a free kick on this.
I don't think they will hang the player out to dry, but they would both be mad not to take the opportunity to use this as a way of educating players. Let's face it, regardless of what actually transpired, there are some pretty salient lessons to be learnt for AFL players out of this.
If nothing else, I think this case underlines just how quickly things might go pear shaped if players aren't really careful and think hard before doing. One minute you are a Premiership player, the next you are the subject of a Police investigation that could possibly bring charges (according to the media) that might attract a 2 year jail sentence. One minute you are celebrating a massive team achievement, and the next, rightly or wrongly, the focus is being taken off that achievement which effects not only you, but your team mates, the club and even to some extent its supporters.
It is called trial by media, and regardless of whether it is right or wrong, it is a reality.
-
AFL integrity unit takes over investigation into Richmond photo scandal
Michael Warner,
Herald Sun
October 26, 2017
THE AFL integrity department has launched a probe into the Richmond premiership photo scandal.
Victoria Police formally notified the AFL this afternoon that it had ceased its investigations at the request of the alleged victim.
Evidence gathered by police will not be handed to the league, which will conduct its own probe.
The AFL has the power to punish players and officials under its broad misconduct rules.
The investigation will also test the AFL’s new respect and responsibility policy.
At least one Tigers player faces a fine or suspension for allegedly circulating the nude image in the hours after last month’s Grand Final win over Adelaide.
Other Richmond players proven to have sent on the image could also face sanction.
“This afternoon the AFL was contacted by Victoria Police, confirming their investigation had ceased,” league spokesman Jay Allen said.
“The AFL integrity unit are now investigating the matter.
“We will be in a position to make further comment when the integrity unit’s investigation is complete.
“We ask to please respect the privacy of those involved.”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/richmond/afl-integrity-unit-takes-over-investigation-into-richmond-photo-scandal/news-story/ab32a99374a5d7ced684b031c9baf23b
-
So if I have this right the police have dropped this on the request of the girl as it causing too much distress which I assume is for her.
However now the AFL are going to launch their own investigation and because information can't be handed over have to go through it all again from scratch.
But it's Ok as they make a statement to ask everyone to respect the privacy of the parties involved.
Clowns will cause more distress to the girl at the sake of the AFLs public image of being a morale crusader.
-
It's behind the Age's paywall
But what I read before the paywall came up ;D
RFC player is back from his holiday, has engaged his own legal team and is facing sanction from the Club
The thing is, the Police dropping their investigation has given both the AFL and Richmond a free kick on this.
I actually agree with this bit. If the Club and the player are smart, they can move from on from this quickly if they get on the front foot and deal with it before the AFL ride in on their bulldozer.
-
So can somebody let us know who has returned home early from Bali?
:lol
-
Can't wait for the public Clayton's apology and the 2 week suspension.
-
Well well well
Listening to SEN driving in this morning they said that even though the Police investigation is currently closed the AFL & RFC are still reviewing / investigating this
So clearly it isn't over
technically its not over but with the police investigation closed (the most serious investigation), this train has run out of coal and is gliding silently to an imminent halt.
you know it. i know it. even the media with their stunning absence of opinion pieces knows it.
in the the absence of a conviction (let alone a complaint to the police) and to keep identites anonymous, the most that will feasibly happen is a fine. if that. And if a fine happens it will be to manage perceptions rather than anything else.
Dooks, the only difference between the situation as it stands right now to when the police were involved is the potential justice action on the Perp, we now know with certainty because the case has been dropped and will NOT proceed to a court of law that the Perp will not be going to jail for his actions. Unless of course the case is again re-opened by police at the request of the victim, a fact which the papers keep ramming down our throats as a potential possibility.
The train as you put it is not comming to an inevitable holt. In the MIND of the AFL they must act, In the MIND of the president of the Richmond FC they must act, the credibility of both of these entities is at stake. The problem that both these entities face is administering a Justice action against the Perp that will be deemed appropriate by the industry and associated communities and the general public, they have also got to do this by not allowing there actions to disclose publicly the identity of the victim and quite possibly even the Perp, to do that could lead to the re-opening of the case because at that point of disclosure you could well say her violation is complete.
Fines, sanctions and education is probably what they are going to try to do without disclosure of either identity.
-
"Perp"?
Methinks somebody's watched too many Seppo cop shows....... :shh
-
Have we got a profile of the unsub yet?
-
Have we got a profile of the unsub yet?
I'm working on it now
(https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/8/14/16/original-grid-image-6249-1376510794-32.jpg?crop=467:700;0,-1&downsize=715:*&output-format=auto&output-quality=auto)
-
The train as you put it is not comming to an inevitable holt. In the MIND of the AFL they must act, In the MIND of the president of the Richmond FC they must act, the credibility of both of these entities is at stake.
I think you should have also mentioned the CEO of the RFC in the above - he is a major player at club level here due to the statements he has made in the past about equality and respect
Something like "In the MIND of the president & CEO of the Richmond FC they must act,
;)
-
BTW - when was this Nude Premiership -which I presume we also won as they gave us medals for it -?
-
BTW - when was this Nude Premiership -which I presume we also won as they gave us medals for it -?
It was held around 1am at the after party at Crown but the medal ceremony was at an as yet unknown private home location.... :shh
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
-
So if I have this right the police have dropped this on the request of the girl as it causing too much distress which I assume is for her.
However now the AFL are going to launch their own investigation and because information can't be handed over have to go through it all again from scratch.
But it's Ok as they make a statement to ask everyone to respect the privacy of the parties involved.
Clowns will cause more distress to the girl at the sake of the AFLs public image of being a morale crusader.
Salient point in the true context of the known situation.
-
"Perp"?
Methinks somebody's watched too many Seppo cop shows....... :shh
I dont watch television, what is a "Seppo cop show"
-
"Perp"?
Methinks somebody's watched too many Seppo cop shows....... :shh
Perp means perpetrator, not sure if you new what i meant.
-
BTW - when was this Nude Premiership -which I presume we also won as they gave us medals for it -?
Don't know mate, but that is the best clash strip I have ever seen
-
"Perp"?
Methinks somebody's watched too many Seppo cop shows....... :shh
American eyes, American eyes,
View the world from American eyes,
Bury the past, rob us blind,
leave nothing behind. X2
Just stare. X4
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
x2
-
Dot points :yep
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
x2
that would be cool
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
x2
that would be cool
Please
-
Saw the original. Not bad.
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
x2
that would be cool
Please
:lol
-
I understand I can't reveal the details of the issue publicly but if anyone needs clarification I'm happy to shed light on what has happened and wants me to forward some dot points in a PM.
for confirmarion - yes please.
x2
Tisk tisk me thinks he's lying
-
Still yet to hear anything. PM or otherwise.
-
Broad named, presser at 11am with him and Peg
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-name-nathan-broad-as-player-at-centre-of-photo-scandal-20171029-gzaou0.html
-
Broad named, presser at 11am with him and Peg
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-name-nathan-broad-as-player-at-centre-of-photo-scandal-20171029-gzaou0.html
Well done Tiges on the front foot before the AFL
Means Club is in control, needs to be this way
-
Caro's Article
==========
Richmond name Nathan Broad as player at centre of photo scandal
By: Caroline Wilson
The AFL and Richmond have exposed Nathan Broad as the player who distributed the photograph of a topless woman without her permission on the night of the grand final.
Broad, who had known the woman previously and had told her he had deleted the photograph as soon as he had taken it at her request, faces a significant punishment to be announced shortly by club president Peggy O'Neal. O'Neal and Broad will make statements at 11am on Monday.
The decision comes after weeks of negotiations with the woman, who has been traumatised by the affair, and her family and legal team who had fought to preserve her anonymity and feared naming Broad could expose her due to their previous relationship.
The woman's lawyers Maurice Blackburn confirmed Broad, the 24-year-old defender who played in the premiership victory, had previously known the woman who "believed there was a level of trust between them".
"She maintains that she insisted he delete the photo from his mobile phone as soon as it was taken, and that he assured her it had been," a statement read.
"She was shocked and extremely confused when she saw the photo on social media the night after the grand final."
Broad had been holidaying in Bali as the investigation continued and initially had chosen not to return home. He has engaged his own legal team and was interviewed last week by the AFL's new integrity boss Tony Keane with Steve Wyatt handling the Tigers' part of the investigation.
The woman's lawyers added that her motivation for informing the police was in a bid to gain assistance in getting her image removed from the internet, rather than pursue a criminal investigation.
The AFL's integrity team, in conjunction with Richmond, is understood to have reached a decision on Broad's penalty late last week but have been working with Maurice Blackburn to ensure any public statements did not further traumatise the woman.
Both the league and Richmond have insisted her well-being remained the priority even above their determination to penalise Broad.
According to the Maurice Blackburn statement: "The unauthorised distribution of her photograph and the subsequent attention it has received has had a devastating impact on the young girl's well being.
"She is desperate to maintain her anonymity as she tries to get on with her life as best she can."
The full statement reads:
"There has been enormous media and public speculation about the situation in which the photograph was taken, the majority of which is not true and is unfair to our client who has done nothing wrong.
"She has not received any money or other compensation from the player, the Richmond Football Club or the AFL.
"We can confirm that the woman knew the player prior to the 2017 grand final and believed there was a level of trust between them. She maintains that she insisted he delete the photo from his mobile phone as soon as it was taken, and that he assured her it had been.
"She was shocked and extremely confused when she saw the photo on social media the night after the grand final. She approached the player and football club for help to getting it removed from the internet, but it soon became apparent that the image had gone 'viral'.
"Her motivation for approaching police was for assistance in getting the image deleted from wherever it had been uploaded, rather than pursuing a criminal investigation into the player's conduct. The latter was never her intention.
"The young woman's decision not to proceed with the police investigation was motivated by her desire to protect her identity and avoid any further attention and distress. Her main focus has been protecting her privacy, welfare and dignity as she tries to come to terms with what has happened.
"The unauthorised distribution of her photograph and the subsequent attention it has received has had a devastating impact on the young woman's wellbeing. She is desperate to maintain her anonymity as she tries to get on with her life as best she can.
"For that reason, we ask the media and public to immediately cease speculating about what happened, and urge everyone to respect the young woman and her family's privacy.
"We remind everyone that any further distribution and/or publication of the image could constitute a criminal offence. Similarly, identifying the young woman exposes them to the risk of civil legal action.
"Our client does not wish to make any further comments."
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-name-nathan-broad-as-player-at-centre-of-photo-scandal-20171029-gzaou0.html
-
Broad named, presser at 11am with him and Peg
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-name-nathan-broad-as-player-at-centre-of-photo-scandal-20171029-gzaou0.html
Well done Tiges on the front foot before the AFL
Means Club is in control, needs to be this way
What you reckon the penalty will be?
-
4 and a fine, not necessarily what I think it should be just what I think he will get.
-
Got three weeks.
-
What you reckon the penalty will be?
Reckon it will be around
6 games
2 JLT and 4 H&A
Plus a fine
Like GR12 - not what I think it should be but reckon they will whack him hard
-
Got three weeks.
Then got off lightly
Though he'd get more, a lot more
-
Didn't like the optics of getting up and walking out without taking questions. Can understand the need to move on quickly, but they could have played a dead bat to a few questions.
-
Didn't like the optics of getting up and walking out without taking questions. Can understand the need to move on quickly, but they could have played a dead bat to a few questions.
A dead bat to the questions can be just as disrespectful.
-
Well handled
It's done now we all move on
-
So who comes in for Broad?
:cheers
-
So who comes in for Broad?
:cheers
Markov
-
Well handled
It's done now we all move on
Agreed...time to move on and prepare for back to back :gotigers
-
NATHAN Broad has been suspended for the first three home-and-away games of 2018 after being identified as the Richmond player who distributed a photo of a topless woman without her permission following the 2017 Grand Final.
Broad and president Peggy O'Neal fronted a news conference on Monday, where Richmond declared it would not allow Broad's actions to go unpunished.
The 24-year-old premiership defender was contrite, hoping that what he had done would stop others from doing the same.
"I am ashamed and I am embarrassed. I made a very bad drunken decision … (and) I let down a young woman who I cared about,” Broad said.
He urged everyone who had viewed the photo to delete it and not share it with anyone.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-30/tiger-to-front-media-over-topless-photo-scandal
-
(http://www.aflphotos.com.au/images/thumbs/450/2017/10/30/559797.jpg) (http://www.aflphotos.com.au/images/thumbs/450/2017/10/30/559807.jpg)
http://www.aflphotos.com.au/galleries/results/?q=collection:AFL%202017%20Media%20-%20Richmond%20Press%20Conference%20301017&image_id=559796
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Broad, 24, read a statement in front of the media at Punt Rd Oval on Monday flanked by Tigers president Peggy O’Neal.
“I take full responsibility for what I've done,” Broad said. “I sent a very private picture without this young woman’s consent.
“I’m ashamed, I’m embarrassed and I made a very bad drunken decision. Not only have I let down my family, my friends and the Richmond Football Club, most of all I let down a young woman, who I cared about. A young woman who I spent time with before the grand final and a young woman who I like and respect.”
“I’m deeply sorry for the heartache I caused this young woman and her family, it was never my intention to hurt her,” Broad continued. “By sending the picture I lied to her and broke her trust.
“This young woman deserves to have her privacy respected ... I’m the one who deserves to be punished, not this woman. She does not deserve any more pain.”
O’Neal said the woman “deserved better” and revealed Broad would be suspended by the club for the first three games of next season.
“We’re incredibly sorry for the distress Nathan’s actions have caused the young woman,” O’Neal said.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/tiger-behind-topless-medal-photo-named-and-shamed/news-story/579395ddc8c090b678c716f3497289ac
-
Woop de doo.
We move on....
-
Gee how lucky the mainstream media have said who it is (i.e. before the press conference even happened) so now we're allowed to talk about who did it even though we all already knew ::) ::)
-
Broad, Broad, Broad, it was Broad! Shock horror!
WP & OER successfully avoid another lawsuit... :clapping
One can only wonder in amazement how the far more high profile Big Footy board wasn't sued despite posters naming Broad dozens of times a day, every day since the photo came out....and that was just on the Richmond forum... :shh
-
Has anyone ever been successfully sued posting facts (that were yet unproved) before?
I've asked some of my my lawyer friends and to their knowledge no such case has happened in Aus.
-
Is there a chance the AFL will step in and impose an additional punishment? Or is this done now?
-
Is there a chance the AFL will step in and impose an additional punishment? Or is this done now?
Yep. And it may get reopened without the need for the victim to press charges.
-
Apparently a few players within the club think the punishment is way too lenient....namely Oleg Markov, Jayden Short & Ryan Garthwaite.... :shh
-
It's over.
Well handled.
Two weeks too many.
-
Well handled.
I bet they were....(http://rs132.pbsrc.com/albums/q17/Tuco60s/gifs/groucho-vi.gif~c100)
-
They were there for the taking .....
-
Where’s the punishment towards the media that circulated those pics?
-
Where’s the punishment towards the media that circulated those pics?
Profits sex sells you know.
-
Gee how lucky the mainstream media have said who it is (i.e. before the press conference even happened) so now we're allowed to talk about who did it even though we all already knew ::) ::)
Broad, Broad, Broad, it was Broad! Shock horror!
WP & OER successfully avoid another lawsuit... :clapping
One can only wonder in amazement how the far more high profile Big Footy board wasn't sued despite posters naming Broad dozens of times a day, every day since the photo came out....and that was just on the Richmond forum... :shh
1. As we've said many times, what other forums/websites do is their choice and their risk. We don't care!
2. On social media and other forums, I saw at least 4 different Richmond players named as the player involved in this photo scandal. Clearly, 3 of those rumours posted elsewhere were wrong. A perfect illustration for why we don't allow unsubstantiated rumours of this nature to be posted on here.
3. As mods, our duty is to protect OER (and ourselves). There was an issue a few years ago where OER was "requested" to remove certain post(s) by the legal representative of a former player (non-Richmond). We even had to go via Google to remove the cached links. All traces of these post(s) and links to them had to be removed. Now you guys may mock and think it's all a joke, but defamation laws are not to be messed around with. Sure some people don't care what is posted about them but others do and when they do they don't muck around :P. There isn't the luxury of guessing who will or won't take legal action. So, it's not hard to understand our requests to not post unsubstantiated rumours about people that could be classed as defamatory.
-
The AFL Integrity Unit confirmed they had completed their investigation and released a statement following Broad's press conference.
"The behaviour of Nathan Broad breaches the AFL’s Rules and the AFL’s Respect and Responsibility Policy,” AFL General Counsel Andrew Dillon said.
"All AFL players receive annual education on AFL codes and policies, including the use of mobile phone technology and various digital platforms. Nathan’s actions were irresponsible and totally unacceptable and have caused enormous distress for a young woman and her family.
"The AFL has accepted the Richmond Football Club’s three-match sanction, during the 2018 AFL Premiership season.
"The AFL also acknowledge Nathan’s cooperation and public apology today.
"This is a serious reminder about the responsibility each individual holds in their respectful treatment of the people around them. These unacceptable actions will not be tolerated in the AFL, and our 18 clubs will continue to work to drive cultural change about respectful and responsible behaviour."
https://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/10/30/10/36/richmond-tigers-to-address-media-over-topless-woman-photo
-
Richmond nude photo scandal takes its toll on player, victim
Jay Clark,
Herald Sun
30 October 2017
NATHAN Broad walked into the Richmond theatrette carrying a huge weight.
For weeks the premiership backman would have been living with regret, wishing he had deleted instead of distributed the photo of his semi-naked friend.
She was someone, Broad said today, he respected and liked, but had ultimately let down horribly.
What happened in the aftermath of Richmond’s premiership will live with Broad, and the woman in question, forever.
As he sat down at the table, ran his hands down his tie and then pressed hard into the folds of the paper in front of him, it was clear this had taken a significant toll on Broad, too.
He looked up into the flash of the cameras and took a deep breath before he began.
Broad, 24, said he was ashamed of his actions and was deeply sorry. There were no ifs or butts at Punt Rd, it was a straight-out apology.
He was the one who had stuffed-up, here, he said. He was the one who should have known better.
Broad’s face was ashen, and his eyes burned with remorse.
He held tightly on to the piece of paper as he read a prepared statement for one minute, and then sat there for another two minutes as president Peggy O’Neal read hers.
When O’Neal got to the part about the three-game punishment, Broad reached for his water, and took a nervous sip.
He appeared genuinely shaken, and so Broad should.
This was not only a life lesson for himself, and his teammates, but for all professional athletes about respect and responsibility for all people, and the beast that is social media.
“Don’t distribute” is the key takeaway.
There were other questions of course, like who else at Richmond passed on this harmful photo.
You wondered how all the dots joined up, and in the immediate aftermath, how senior people reacted when the photo, and news of its existence, spread?
But they would not answer questions today.
Before Broad and O’Neal sat front and centre, Richmond public relations boss Nicky Malady told journalists the pair would not take questions from the floor.
That was out of respect to the woman and her family, Malady said.
Football boss Neil Balme sat up in one of the back corners of the Richmond auditorium.
As Broad and O’Neal got up from the table and exited the room, one television reporter fired one question away from the front row, wanting to know more.
If the woman’s privacy was paramount, why was Broad outed as the Tiger responsible, he asked.
But Broad and O’Neal were headed out the door.
Everyone at the club desperately wants this to go away.
And the AFL fixture release tomorrow morning will quickly ensure the focus turns back on to dream draws and tough runs home by 9.30am.
But for two individuals and their friends and family, the pain lingers.
Today, we saw just a glimpse of that human toll.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/richmond/human-toll-of-nathan-broad-actions-in-richmond-photo-scandal-clear-in-tigers-press-conference/news-story/5f432e61a9324e11e8f5207d356e9184
-
Susie O’Brien says weak punishment a green light for abusers
Susie O’Brien,
Herald Sun
30 October 2017
SHAME on you, Richmond Football Club.
A three-match ban is an inadequate punishment for disgraced Tigers player Nathan Broad.
The premiership player abused a Melbourne woman by sending photos of her naked and topless to his team mates on social media.
He should be booted out of the club and the AFL for good.
A three-match ban is not a penalty, it’s a green light for other abusers, who now know they will get off lightly.
Many women will see it as more of the same: a man who abuses a woman gets off scot-free and is even allowed to save face with a grovelling apology at a highly-staged press conference.
I’d have liked to have seen Richmond CEO Brendan Gale, a Male Champion of Change, sitting next to Broad and president Peggy O’Neal at the press conference.
Gale is overseas but the fact that he wasn’t sitting next to Broad and club president Peggy O’Neal was a bad look.
Instead, it was only Broad and O’Neal up on the stage, which had a completely bare backdrop. A lack of corporate logos and team signage is a rare thing these days, and was a sign Richmond was further trying to protect its own image.
They should all have been seated in front of Richmond signage, and the press conference should have been open to questions.
The fact that Broad didn’t take any questions makes me think he is not as sorry as he says he is.
Sorry he’s been named, perhaps, but not sorry enough to be fully accountable to the media, Tigers fans and footy followers — not to mention to the woman and her family.
A three-match ban is a sanction usually handed down for high tackles, not deliberate and wilful law-breaking.
Even men within the AFL conducting damaging, but consensual, relationships lost their jobs, so why hasn’t this happened here?
It’s not an adequate punishment in this instance and it’s certainly not a deterrent likely to stop others from behaving the same way.
There is not even a financial penalty such as a donation to a Safe Steps, a charity that helps women escape family violence.
It’s being reported that Broad is “taking full responsibility” for the incident. This, too, doesn’t seem to be the case.
Broad only came forward five weeks afterwards. By this time his identity became the worst-kept secret in the footy and media circles.
While the woman was hiding back in Melbourne and trying to cope with the fallout, Broad was living it up overseas.
Even worse, he was all over social media, where we saw Broad among a contingent of Richmond players who jetted into Hong Kong and headed off straight to the Happy Valley Races.
In comparison, a statement from the woman released today said the incident had a “devastating impact on the young woman’s wellbeing”.
“She is desperate to maintain her anonymity as she tries to get on with her life as best she can,” the Maurice Blackburn statement said.
Broad’s admissions today were too little, too late.
“I’m ashamed and embarrassed and I made a very bad drunken decision,” he said in the prepared statement to the media at 11am.
“I let down a young woman who I cared about, a young woman who I spent time with before the Grand Final, a young woman who I like and respect.
“It was never my intention to hurt her or her family.
“I lied to her and I broke her trust. I’m the one who deserves to be punished”
And yet he isn’t being punished in any meaningful way.
Broad urged anyone who had the photo to delete it immediately and not share it.
It was a classic display of a club doing the absolute minimum to make something go away, without doing enough to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Ms O’Neal said her club was “committed to gender equity and respect; we find these actions to be completely unacceptable”.
“We are incredibly sorry for the distress that has been caused to the young woman who deserves better.”
Yes, the woman does deserve better — from the Richmond Football Club as well as Broad and everyone else.
The woman has decided not to pursue the police investigation and has confirmed she has not received any money or compensation.
Her motivation for going to police was to get help in getting the image deleted rather than pursuing a criminal investigation.
While Broad is free to play again by the fourth round next year, this woman will no doubt carry lifelong scars arising from his abuse of her.
As well as the original act, she has been blamed by many for posing for the photo in the first place. Her actions, more so than Broad’s, have come under harsh scrutiny.
Richmond is continuing the abuse of this innocent woman by failing to punish Broad.
The AFL Integrity Unit has launched its own investigation but I’ll bet it doesn’t go any further than Richmond.
The AFL has power to sanction players and officials under its misconduct rules, with the possibility of suspensions or fines for anyone found to have circulated the image that surfaced after the Grand Final a month ago.
Let’s hope they have the guts to stand up and get rid of Broad altogether. AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan is also a Male Champion of Change, so let’s see him change the way things are done in the AFL.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/susie-obrien/susie-obrien-nathan-broads-ban-a-green-light-for-other-abusers/news-story/797994ef1a5a48c63cbbce94795f755f
-
stfu Susie, one of most annoying bunnies I have ever listened too. I usually have Sunrise on for a whole 10 minutes as background noise while I get my work lunch ready and she's the only person I'll bother stopping to turn it off for just because I find her dribble nauseating.
-
In my opinion Broad got off lightly.
I hope some on here have learnt that his behaviour was unacceptable. It’s never ok to violate a persons privacy. Some say she deserved it. I say no. What she allowed in private doesn’t mean she deserves for everyone to view. If that was my daughter I’d be absolutely ropable and I wouldn’t care who it was that posted it.
Some had speculated about the girl too saying she probably set it up looking for monetary gain.
Noted this type of situation could get someone looking for it an excellent amount of publicity and even a contract with countless magazine spreads. But this girl has done the opposite wanting nothing more than to get her breasts off the internet for everyone to see.
I can only hope all those who rejoiced in seeing a young girls boobs would think about your own daughters and if you haven’t got daughters think about your sisters or even if your Mum was violated in this way and maybe you’d see the wrong.
-
In my opinion Broad got off lightly.
Depending on what sanction you think he might have been hit with, that actually remains to be seen.
I can actually see Broad never playing AFL again. The weight of this on him, and I am not for one minute suggesting he is a victim, is going to be very heavy to carry.
-
Nothing would have happened if the media didn't go bananas. All she wanted was advice and assistance on getting photo taken off social media, which is borderline impossible, but then a can of worms opened.
-
With all facts considered, 3 weeks is pretty rough.
How many did Hodge get for Drink Driving?
No charges were laid. No proof Broad actually distributed anything. Impossivke to prove he pressed the send button if it were to go any further anyway. Although now he has owned up to it, she can press charges later in life....
-
No charges were laid. No proof Broad actually distributed anything. Impossivke to prove he pressed the send button if it were to go any further anyway.
Apart from the small bit of him admitting he did it
-
No charges were laid. No proof Broad actually distributed anything. Impossivke to prove he pressed the send button if it were to go any further anyway.
Apart from the small bit of him admitting he did it
:lol
-
Susie O’Brien says weak punishment a green light for abusers
I’d have liked to have seen Richmond CEO Brendan Gale, a Male Champion of Change, sitting next to Broad and president Peggy O’Neal at the press conference.
Awww poor Susie, do you feel like a man had to be there to supervise the proceedings? Peggy being a woman not enough for you?
P.s anyone else feel Susie is prattling on without a care or consideration for the "photo girls" own thoughts and feelings. Demanding of the situation what Susie wants, not the victim. Pathetic.
-
If that was my daughter I’d be absolutely ropable and I wouldn’t care who it was that posted it.
Some had speculated about the girl too saying she probably set it up looking for monetary gain.
Noted this type of situation could get someone looking for it an excellent amount of publicity and even a contract with countless magazine spreads. But this girl has done the opposite wanting nothing more than to get her breasts off the internet for everyone to see.
I can only hope all those who rejoiced in seeing a young girls boobs would think about your own daughters and if you haven’t got daughters think about your sisters or even if your Mum was violated in this way and maybe you’d see the wrong.
As a mother with a daughter I know for a fact I've brought her up in a way that such behaviour wouldn't happen as she has too much self respect for herself and knows better. My own are nothing to brag about and in the past would have happily chopped the darn things off after several bouts of mastitis! And if you could find my mother's after being dead for 48 years - good luck to you!!!
-
Luke Hodge says Nathan Broad incident is a last chance for AFL players
Daniel Cherny
The Age
31 October 2017
AFL great Luke Hodge says a line in the sand has been drawn following the three-match ban handed down to Richmond premiership defender Nathan Broad, suggesting that the next player to commit a similar offence to that of the Tiger deserves a considerably heftier penalty.
Richmond - in combination with the AFL - suspended West Australian backman Broad for the first three matches of the 2018 home and away season for sending a photo of a topless woman wearing a premiership medal, taken on the night of Richmond's grand final win. Broad did not have permission to send the photo of the woman, whose head was not in the image, although while the photo went viral no charges were laid following a Victoria Police investigation into the matter.
The league said it supported the length of the ban, but while Hodge didn't say it had been overly lenient, he said players should learn from Broad's mistake, or else incur the AFL's wrath.
"People, and players especially, they've got to be smarter and respect ladies better than that," Hodge told ABC radio on Monday as he promoted his newly-released book The General.
"[Broad] probably didn't realise what social media, iPhones can do these days.
"If you send it out on social media, it can go anywhere, the same as a picture message.
"Next time that happens, I hope the AFL comes down a lot harder than this one. I think it's a massive learning curve for him as a young person, and hopefully he's better for it in the future."
Triple-premiership captain and dual Norm Smith medallist Hodge, who has come out of a short-lived retirement to join the Brisbane Lions after a storied 16 season career at Hawthorn, described the situation as a "test case."
"Hopefully this is a learning curve for not only him, but all the other players who are going to do something silly like that," he said.
"I obviously feel for the young lady, and hopefully she hasn't been affected too much by it. Obviously I'm glad that her name hasn't been put out.
"But I'm tipping that now that this has obviously been the test case, if anyone's ever silly enough to do this again, then it's going to be a lot bigger whack, and I think that's very deserved."
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/luke-hodge-says-nathan-broad-incident-is-a-last-chance-for-afl-players-20171030-gzb7va.html
-
‘Just a slap on the wrist’: Nathan Broad’s ban for nude photo scandal slammed by cyber bullying expert
Nine News
8:25pm Oct 30, 2017
A cyber bullying expert has described Richmond defender Nathan Broad’s three-match ban for sending a topless photo of a woman as inadequate.
Susan Mclean from Cyber Safety Solutions said the ban was “too little, too late”.
“I think it’s really just a slap on the wrist,” Ms Mclean told 9NEWS.
She said that Broad should have also received a financial sanction.
“Not only is this behaviour disrespectful, hurtful, and humiliating, it’s also criminal.”
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/10/30/10/09/richmond-statement-on-topless-afl-medal-picture
-
Wow here they come for Broad. Talk about venom...
I guess the media's agenda is more important than the girls wishes to have it over.
-
‘Just a slap on the wrist’: Nathan Broad’s ban for nude photo scandal slammed by cyber bullying expert
Nine News
8:25pm Oct 30, 2017
A cyber bullying expert has described Richmond defender Nathan Broad’s three-match ban for sending a topless photo of a woman as inadequate.
Susan Mclean from Cyber Safety Solutions said the ban was “too little, too late”.
“I think it’s really just a slap on the wrist,” Ms Mclean told 9NEWS.
She said that Broad should have also received a financial sanction.
“Not only is this behaviour disrespectful, hurtful, and humiliating, it’s also criminal.”
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/10/30/10/09/richmond-statement-on-topless-afl-medal-picture
so missing match payments from 3 games isn’t a financial sanction?
And what’s with all Hodge’s comments comments about Richmond lately???
-
And what’s with all Hodge’s comments comments about Richmond lately???
[/quote]
Julz
Interesting observation.
I think Hodge has seen what a great Leader Cotch has been this year and he is trying to make things right after publicly dissing him (Cotch) on The Footy Show.
Probably also looking for a gig in Melbourne next year.
-
Hodge for me was never a great leader to much offield baggage for me all of sudden he is giving advise.Dont even understand why lions took him in a mentor role for young players doesn't scream out as a player as that type.
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
-
Watson on 1116 believes should be 7 to 8 games suspension Mr know it all who never likes to smell his underarms. Maybe bombers players should have got life ban.
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
-
Luke Hodge would want to be careful I reckon
-
I know it's asking too much but can we at least have some truth here without the press-driven exageration.
Change the title of this thread at least.
It was not a "nude" photo. It was a "topless" photo.
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
-
I know it's asking too much but can we at least have some truth here without the press-driven exageration.
Change the title of this thread at least.
It was not a "nude" photo. It was a "topless" photo.
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
And a medal
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
Yes...just ask all those people in wheelchairs or with dead relatives due to nude photos...
-
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
Got any proof of that? Or are you just speculating
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
Yes...just ask all those people in wheelchairs or with dead relatives due to nude photos...
I will ask all the people who can't get jobs, fired from jobs and had to move cities and lives for unsolicited sharing.
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
Yes...just ask all those people in wheelchairs or with dead relatives due to nude photos...
I will ask all the people who can't get jobs, fired from jobs and had to move cities and lives for unsolicited sharing.
Is there a special place they go to?
-
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
Got any proof of that? Or are you just speculating
An associate showed me the photo. She is definitely wearing underwear.
-
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
Got any proof of that? Or are you just speculating
An associate showed me the photo. She is definitely wearing underwear.
I always knew you medicos were dodgy
-
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
Got any proof of that? Or are you just speculating
An associate showed me the photo. She is definitely wearing underwear.
I always knew you medicos were dodgy
:lol
-
wanted to use smileys but not working for me
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
Yes...just ask all those people in wheelchairs or with dead relatives due to nude photos...
I will ask all the people who can't get jobs, fired from jobs and had to move cities and lives for unsolicited sharing.
Yes I'm sure there's thousands...are they all still breathing? Can they still walk?
-
"Nude" by definition means WITHOUT CLOTHING. She is wearing underwear.
Got any proof of that? Or are you just speculating
An associate showed me the photo. She is definitely wearing underwear.
From what I've seen of the photo, if you noticed any underwear you definitely spent WAYYYY to long staring at it :lol
-
Gil McLachlan says Nathan Broad’s punishment was a ‘strong statement’ by Richmond
JON RALPH,
Herald Sun
31 October 2017
AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has labelled Nathan Broad’s sexting controversy a “dramatic breach of trust” by the Tigers defender.
The Tigers’ three-match penalty for Broad has been roundly condemned as too light given the incident could have seen him in jail if charges were laid.
Broad will be available for senior selection in Round 4 but McLachlan said it was a “strong statement” about behaviour towards women.
The AFL will in coming weeks update the full details of its revised Respect and Responsibility code, which has taken 18 months to be signed off.
McLachlan said he was not aware of the public bashlash but believed the Tigers had made a stand.
“I think it was a dramatic breach of trust and an incredibly poor decision,” he said.
“You can’t speculate on what would happen (if another player transgressed) but the lesson is there for all.
“I haven’t seen (the response) this morning but this is something where everyone will have their views.
“But it’s a strong statement and I would be interested to see how people would go if anything like this happened again.
“Whether it’s three, four or five (weeks), it’s a strong statement and strong accountability for a player who has made a very poor decision.”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/richmond/gil-mclachlan-says-nathan-broads-punishment-was-a-strong-statement-by-richmond/news-story/ce0911907b51ac53ce7ba90deb2784da
-
im pretty sure i was told that make sure your backyard is clean before you can comment on others.
taking a photo of a nude chick in the heat of the moment or driving on the roads over the limit putting other lives at danger. Interesting.
If it was Judd or jono brown fine comment but hodge, yeah na stfu champ
To be fair, sending unsolicited nudes can ruin lives just like drunk driving can.
Yes...just ask all those people in wheelchairs or with dead relatives due to nude photos...
I will ask all the people who can't get jobs, fired from jobs and had to move cities and lives for unsolicited sharing.
Yes no doubt there's thousands and it's a massive epidemic....btw....are all these people still breathing? Can they still walk?
Last year there were just under 1300 fatalities on Australian roads. That's just shy of 6 for every 100,000.
https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries.aspx
But your point was regarding people that can walk, so I'll interpret it as people that live with morbidity as a result of car accidents.
According to THIS report from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, that number increases by about 15 times for mordbitity, so about 150 in every 100,000 people.
https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/ea5ab3f1-3ece-4c68-a021-3c659222fee9/15552.pdf.aspx?inline=true
Meanwhile, 1 in 5 Australians are directly affected by Revenge Porn (that's 20,000 for every 100,000)
https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/05/one-in-five-australians-have-been-victims-of-revenge-porn/
That it equally effects both men and women.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/survey-finds-men-and-women-equal-victims-of-revenge-porn-attacks-20170504-gvyjqf.html
Out of interest, the numbers are reported as much lower in the US, but still extremely high. One in 25 people are threatened with or have their lives directly affected as a result of revenge porn.
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/1-in-25-americans-affected-by-revenge-porn-survey-says
So when you say epidemic, you're absolutely correct. And bear in mind, these are not statistics for alcohol related accidents but for total.
According to this:
http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/statistics/summaries/drink-driving-statistics
about 1 in 5 accidents are directly attributable to alcohol.
So what's the point here? Well, I'm not actually trying to argue that one crime is worse than another; although if one takes a utilitarian philosophy on things, Revenge Porn is FAR more taxing on society, statistically speaking. I'm just trying to make the point that it IS a serious issue, what Broady did was very wrong and society needs to be more aware of the consequence's of breaching someones trust.
I mean, if you leave your car unlocked and someone steals you're stuff, YES you're stupid for leaving you car unlocked, but the person (or persons) that stole your stuff are still criminals.
-
Yes and no doubt the defintion of "revenge porn" was clear & settled, all complaints were legitimate and none of those figures and reports were the result of idealogically-driven advocacy research.... :whistle
So what's the point here? Well, I'm not actually trying to argue that one crime is worse than another;
No but you're equating them.... :shh
-
So what's the point here? Well, I'm not actually trying to argue that one crime is worse than another;
No but you're equating them.... :shh
Yep, 100%. Thanks for clarifying my point for me. :thumbsup
-
My pleasure.....
-
Regardless of Broads actions, she's an idiot (that's i d I o t).
How about people throw that Into the equation.
-
Anyone seen Nick Place article in the Age.
What a stuffen loser. Like the Tigers, Broad or anyone owes him his happiness.
Hey Nick GAGF'd
-
Regardless of Broads actions, she's an idiot (that's i d I o t).
How about people throw that Into the equation.
.
But the media think shes the gold standard of integrity.
-
Anyone seen Nick Place article in the Age.
What a stuffen loser. Like the Tigers, Broad or anyone owes him his happiness.
Hey Nick GAGF'd
While I think it is a bit over the top, I can relate to the sentiment.
When this story first broke, my feelings on it oscillated between thinking it was all a joke, to being angry that one of our players could so stupidly blemish what should have been a time of great celebration. And I actually was angry at times.
-
Regardless of Broads actions, she's an idiot (that's i d I o t).
How about people throw that Into the equation.
.
But the media think shes the gold standard of integrity.
the funniest thing is when it happened to NICK R and Del Santo the public laughed including OER members.
switch things around and now its a girl..
You know the drill.
-
Anyone seen Nick Place article in the Age.
What a stuffen loser. Like the Tigers, Broad or anyone owes him his happiness.
Hey Nick GAGF'd
Lol. He's angry for benny and peg.
What an ass 💩
-
Anyone seen Nick Place article in the Age.
I have two words for Nathan Broad: I'm angry
Nick Place
The Age
1 November 2017
A bunch of us gathered last Sunday to watch the grand final replay again. Look, we're Tigers. The concept of how many times can you watch a game has not yet occurred to us, and may not for a while yet.
But there was a difference last Sunday. Every time a certain Tiger went for the ball, my wife cursed quietly, under her breath.
It hadn't been hard to narrow down who the sexting Tiger was, even before it was made public. In these days of social media, you can effortlessly keep track of which members of your team have steady girlfriends or wives, who hangs out with who, who's on holiday where, and everything else you require to cross-reference and eliminate suspects.
Nathan Broad had posted photos of himself with The Boys, always The Boys, in Flemington and Hong Kong, but then had gone quiet, even though he was in other photos from Bali, where he seemed to have been on holidays with Brandon Ellis.
And so, we watched the TV replay and my wife, a mad Tiger, found her distaste for Broad's actions with a phone camera overwhelming her joy for any of his heroics on grand final day.
Me? I'm angry.
I'm incredibly angry if it's true, as per the reports, that Broad had a previous relationship with this woman, she specifically asked him to delete the photo, and that she has suffered the deep anguish reported because he betrayed her trust. I don't think missing three games – roughly the same as a mild hamstring strain – cuts it as a punishment.
I'm angry that our beautiful Tiger paradise has had Nathan Broad pee in the swimming pool. Angry that all the other premiership players have spent weeks now carrying the suspicion that they were the hole disrespecting a woman who trusted them.
I'm angry because the AFL deserves credit for how hard it has worked to promote respect for women. As the removal of two senior executives from head office earlier this year shows, there appears to be a long way to go. But the league has been trying for a long time now, employing an "integrity team" and staff who regularly try to guide impressionable, very young men across all 18 teams how to deal respectfully and appropriately with fans and fame.
I'm angry for Brendon Gale and Peggy O'Neal, who have done so much to finally make Richmond a successful, powerful, fun club to barrack for again. I feel deeply for O'Neal, who has been forced to change gear from enjoying her moment of universal respect as the AFL's first female president, to having to sit alongside Nathan Broad in the glare of a hostile media and feel the heat of disgust from women fans across Australia.
Last, but by no means least, I'm angry for the woman at the heart of all this who is so obviously and genuinely stricken by what's happened. I hope she can move past it, and remains anonymous.
Today I received an email from the club, with the subject: "Happy one month anniversary, Tiger army." Exactly a month after 22 players climbed into the hearts of us Tiger fans forever, cherished heroes one and all, the number just dropped to 21.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/i-have-two-words-for-nathan-broad-im-angry-20171031-gzbqg2.html
-
he's angry, well I am furious
-
he's angry, well I am furious
Well I am ropable.
-
Im offended.
-
Last word, I really didn't want yo add anymore to this..
Anyway no he is not a Tiger, he can GAGF not condoning Broad in any way either but ffs move on and that includes all these forums and journos bleating on ad nauseum
That club made a statement and asked for it to be put to bed as much for the sake of the girl but the bleeding hearts in their false bravado don't listen, which to me makes them as bad if not worse than the rest that just want to move on.
I think this thread should be closed tbh
Premiers 2017
Nothing can or will take any gloss of that to me
🏆🐯
-
Yeah not sure how this could ruin the experience for anyone outside those involved, but each to their own.
-
Next they will be making illegal the mental wank bank unless we get permission first
-
Next they will be making illegal the mental wank bank unless we get permission first
I’m pleading guilty and expect a harsh sentence.
-
Next they will be making illegal the mental wank bank unless we get permission first
I’m pleading guilty and expect a harsh sentence.
Reported to White Ribbon
-
Next they will be making illegal the mental wank bank unless we get permission first
I’m pleading guilty and expect a harsh sentence.
On top of the flogging you've already received? Harsh indeed....
-
Give this man a soap box.
-
East West St Moritz
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
If true
Wouldn't surprise in the slightest
Actually more surprised there hasn't been any "agitation" noise from any of them
Though behind closed doors I've got no doubt there was a lot phone calls
-
One out
One in
if one is pulling the pin good luck to them heading into a prime time season of 2018. Dont forget to shut the door on your way out love.
-
One out
One in
if one is pulling the pin good luck to them heading into a prime time season of 2018. Dont forget to shut the door on your way out love.
Agree best time to be associated with the RFC
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
A club sponsor , not a player sponsor ;)
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
A club sponsor , not a player sponsor ;)
Club 😉.far from happy apparently
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
A club sponsor , not a player sponsor ;)
Club 😉.far from happy apparently
OMG get them a soapbox
-
I “ hear “ a sponsor has pulled the plug
Stay tuned 😉
They can get stuffed thenn. Let's get Bose instead
-
Sponsors can pull the plug all they want. Premiership juggernaut will move on and they will line up to jump on the flag bandwagon.
-
Sponsors can pull the plug all they want. Premiership juggernaut will move on and they will line up to jump on the flag bandwagon.
Yep. Nothing to see hear. Move on
-
YBB will be disappointed if what people are alluding to are correct
-
Page 13 today’s HUN
Waiting for Benny to get back from Bali Holiday it seems
-
Don't get the HUN, who is so outraged they have opted out? Madness!
-
Sponsors can pull the plug all they want. Premiership juggernaut will move on and they will line up to jump on the flag bandwagon.
Exactly
Who gives a stuff
Move on
-
A good test of how allegedly 'overwhelmingly outragious' the players actions and the clubs handling of this matter is, is by asking the following question:- how many existing members will not renew for 2018.
Anyone?
If you are renewing your membership, ask yourself why and thats the level of importance this whole saga has.
-
Well if this sponsor of only 12 months wants to jump of the biggest Club in the land well.......see-ya! Don't think we will have an issues replacing them but i bet they have a change of heart and stay on.
-
Page 13 today’s HUN
Waiting for Benny to get back from Bali Holiday it seems
HUN have named the sponsor as Bang and Olufsen. Article very clear nothing has happened as yet. All conjecture
Said yesterday I am surprised that so far there hasnt been any residual fall out with sponsor over this saga. No surprise at all that this has arisen
People are naive to think the club havent had to deal with sponsors anger over this. Club would have spoken to every single one of them to ensure they don't walk when this became publicly known
We are talking huge $$$ here and rightly companies worry about how their brand are viewed via their sponsorhip
While I get the arguement it doesnt matter if they walk we will get a replacement easily. Yeah most probably but the cost that will hit the club if they do work will be significant. No guarantee we wil get the same $$ and the B&O one we have for shorts is a one of the better ones
Facts are there is a huge amount of season 2018 Puma merch about to come thorough the doors this month. Lose a sponsor and all that stuff goes in the bin. Then you have to wait for new stuff to come in, in the new year. That hurt the club because it costs the club
So although it is easy to say it doesn't matter, stuff 'em, who cares it still will be disappointing if they do walk and costly
-
Heard it was actually the club's decision to let them go....the thinking being that in the wake of "tittygate" it wasn't really a good to look to be strutting around with "Bang" written on our shorts.....:shh
-
Page 13 today’s HUN
Waiting for Benny to get back from Bali Holiday it seems
HUN have named the sponsor as Bang and Olufsen. Articlevery clear nothing has happened as yet. All conjecture
Said yesterday I am surprised that so far there hasnt been any residual fall out with sponsor over this saga. No surprise at all that this has arisen
People are naive to think the club havent had to deal with sponsors anger over this. Club would have spoken to every single one of them to ensure they don't walk when this became publicly known
We are talking huge $$$ here and rightly companies worry about how their brand are viewed via their sponsorhip
While I get the arguement it doesnt matter if they walk we will get a replacement easily. Yeah most probably but the cost that will hit the club if they do work will be significant. No guarantee we wil get the same $$ and the B&O one we have for shorts is a one of the better ones
Facts are there is a huge amount of season 2018 Puma merch about to come thorough the doors this month. Lose a sponsor and all that stuff goes in the bin. Then you have to wait for new stuff to come in, in the new year. That hurt the club because it costs the club
So although it is easy to say it doesn't matter, stuff 'em, who cares it still will be disappointing if they do walk and costly
Got excited for a minute when I thought I was going to learn a new word: "Articlevery" (sad I know)
Anyway amazing what a missing space will do.
:lol
-
Heard it was actually the club's decision to let them go....the thinking being that in the wake of "tittygate" it wasn't really a good to look to be strutting around with "Bang" written on our shorts.....:shh
that's interesting
Nothing is official at this stage
Conversations / discussions continuing
-
Woosh ;D
-
Woosh ;D
:lol :lol
-
Page 13 today’s HUN
Waiting for Benny to get back from Bali Holiday it seems
HUN have named the sponsor as Bang and Olufsen. Article very clear nothing has happened as yet. All conjecture
Said yesterday I am surprised that so far there hasnt been any residual fall out with sponsor over this saga. No surprise at all that this has arisen
People are naive to think the club havent had to deal with sponsors anger over this. Club would have spoken to every single one of them to ensure they don't walk when this became publicly known
We are talking huge $$$ here and rightly companies worry about how their brand are viewed via their sponsorhip
While I get the arguement it doesnt matter if they walk we will get a replacement easily. Yeah most probably but the cost that will hit the club if they do work will be significant. No guarantee we wil get the same $$ and the B&O one we have for shorts is a one of the better ones
Facts are there is a huge amount of season 2018 Puma merch about to come thorough the doors this month. Lose a sponsor and all that stuff goes in the bin. Then you have to wait for new stuff to come in, in the new year. That hurt the club because it costs the club
So although it is easy to say it doesn't matter, stuff 'em, who cares it still will be disappointing if they do walk and costly
Is she a Bang or an Olufsen ?
-
Nathan Broad's actions seem criminal, yet his punishment is incredibly light
Darren Kane
WA Today
5 November 2017
In the words written at the command of a mind more sapient; more virtuous than mine: the more you see, the less you know; the less you find out as you go; I knew much more then, than I do now. And how!
The longer I go on, I know less and less. Either that, or maybe it's just that you come to understand all that you don't know, if you catch my drift. You know that hypothetical question, about which superpower you'd pick over all others … I wouldn't pick any. But oh, how I'd love a crystal ball that functioned as something other than an anger management tool.
But perhaps it's just the sardonic mood of the room I'm in. I'm sitting here writing this column (with a fountain pen, as is my wont) in an Italian restaurant on Macquarie Street. As I begin scribbling, the opening bars of Speak Softly, Love hang in the background, wafting from the sound system. It's the height of irony, actually. You'd never identify that arrangement by name. You might however recognise the instrumental, as the title theme from The Godfather. A production hardly known for either soft dialogue or love.
So many mixed messages! And on that topic, can someone please explain to me the outcome of the investigation into the circumstances of the circulation of a photograph, depicting a topless woman, wearing nothing much other than a Richmond player's AFL premiership-winning medallion?
Based on the statements released this week by each of Tigers president Peggy O'Neal and Tigers player Nathan Broad, the latter is clearly the instigator who caused the unauthorised dissemination of a very personal picture of the said woman. In defiance of her explicit request that he delete the photo (and Broad's untruthful assurance to her, that he had). Broad's words warrant direct quotation:
"I take full responsibility for what I have done.
"I sent a very private picture without this young woman's consent. I am ashamed and embarrassed. I made a very bad drunken decision.
"Not only have I let down my family, my friends and the Richmond Football Club, but most of all I let down a young woman who I cared about. A young woman who I spent time with before the grand final. A young woman who I liked and respected.
"I'm deeply sorry for the heartache that I've caused this young woman and her family. It was never my intention to hurt her or her family. By sending the picture I lied to her and broke her trust.
"This young woman deserves to have her privacy respected. To the media … the longer this story keeps running the more suffering it will cause her and her family. I am the one who deserves to be punished but this woman does not deserve any more pain."
For all of this, Broad has incurred the featherweight penalty, of being suspended for the first three home-and-away matches of the 2018 season. No monetary penalty or financial recompense; no "hard toil" in the community. Just three matches, on the bench. That's it.
That's it, in circumstances where prima facie, what Broad's copped to doing amounts to a criminal offence in Victoria, carrying the possibility of two years in the big house. Though a custodial sentence in the circumstances would've been unlikely, this is a criminal act – even in the event the Victorian Police hadn't ceded to the request from Broad's victim, to drop the criminal investigation. That's the prism through which this ought be viewed. Criminal behaviour, against a young female victim, who can't fight back.
A simple Google search brings up various incarnations of the image in question; some redacted, others not so much. The Internet can't easily be cleansed – once an image is floating around in cyberspace, it's there forever more. It's trite for Broad to propound the argument that the media risks prolonging the poor girl's agony, should the story be reported on further. The ignominy of having the photograph in circulation won't just dissipate, in line with the media's future disinterest.
And for Broad to hide behind his apparent drunkenness, as some sort of excuse, is manifestly weak. Yes, Broad ought be ashamed, and embarrassed. But neither emotion ought be allowed to be diluted, just because he was sozzled at the exact moment he pressed "send". And especially so after having promised the lady in question that he would do the exact opposite, and delete the image.
The outcome is potentially catastrophic, for the woman concerned. It's irrelevant that she consented to the image being taken in the first place. And frankly, Broad would come across so much more a man, if he didn't hide at all behind alcohol as an excuse. Just as words spoken or written can't be taken back, for the victim in this situation matters can't easily be put right.
To the sanction: a three-match ban is, in all the circumstances, manifestly light. Yet doubling or tripling the sanction would achieve no more. For it's not about the penalty, so much as realising that no penalty can properly address the "heartache" (to use Broad's words) and devastation that he's caused; and that his actions will likely continue to cause, into the future.
It's interesting in a way to draw a line between Broad's actions and those of the English cricketer Ben Stokes. And for good measure, throw in the brawling by the "Italian" rugby league players James Tedesco and Shannon Wakeman. Tedesco and Wakeman's post-match fisticuffs in a Cairns pub may yet result in some sort of sanction by Rugby League World Cup organisers, though neither combatant seems all that concerned, nor does the Italian Rugby League. It's odd though, how such shenanigans can happen during a world cup campaign. Should Italy qualify for the FIFA World Cup next year, you can't imagine the same goings on in Russia.
Stokes didn't fly to Australia with England's Ashes squad. It's highly doubtful he will be a late arrival, and he most certainly will not be unless the police investigating the circumstances of his late September brawl conclude their investigations without charging him. Recent reports of Stokes defending two men against homophobic slurs as being the catalyst for the fisticuffs might be truthful; they might be convenient explanations. But Stokes' actions remain objectively vicious.
All three situations involve potentially criminal behaviour. But my point is this, whatever Tedesco, Wakeman or Stokes have done, each were fighting against someone who had at least some degree of opportunity – even if not an equal chance – of fighting back.
Broad's victim had no such hope. She was totally blindsided, and lied to. And that's utterly unfair.
http://www.watoday.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-photo-scandal-nathan-broads-actions-seem-criminal-yet-his-punishment-is-incredibly-light-20171103-gze39c.html
-
Thanks Dazza
-
finally dazza has come to the party. Thank stuff
-
Dazza lost me when he said that he was in a "sardonic mood" and writing with a fountain pen in Macquarie street. W.A.N.K.E.R. Of the highest order. Doesn't know all the facts and from his high position is making judgements. Hate these holier than thou pricks. Get a stuffing life.
-
Dazza lost me when he said that he was in a "sardonic mood" and writing with a fountain pen in Macquarie street. W.A.N.K.E.R. Of the highest order. Doesn't know all the facts and from his high position is making judgements. Hate these holier than thou pricks. Get a stuffing life.
Dazza is a lawyer. Think he is allowed to make judgements from a legal perspective ;D
Personally thought it was a interesting read
Seriously i don't get the angst just becasue people give an opinion that others dont like. Why resort to playing the man / woman and not the ball
Having read eveyrthing, done some reasearch of the law, spoken / discussed with numerous folks, taken a step back to take my Tiger coloured glasses off I reckon Broad got off very lightly.
I get peoples want to protect one of their own but it doesn't excuse for a second the legality let alone the stupidity of what happened here
Before the club penalty my view was he shouldn't cop too harsh of a whack but that changed after lots of robust discussion with a couple of people.
There is actually a sentence in Dazza's article that highlights one of reasons my view changed. And it relates to using being drunk as being an excuse. Agree with Dazza it's cowardly but all too common these days. We here it around "coward punches", etc. It is no excuse
Whack away
-
Careful. An informed and intuitive opinion has no place on OER.
At least he's not American....
-
Interesting read this topic
If she consented and it appears she did
Who actually owned /owns the photo ?
N.Broad
Big issue were the ones who then re texted it after it was originally forwarded to others
Refer to his well worded press conference
“ please stop from forwarding this pic on “
Have spoken to many involved with “ withholding the law “ and it appears RFC suspension would have more to do with Club and society values rather than breaking the law
Otherwise the police would pursue this matter further is they had a concrete case
Only my opinion
Have had similar issue recently with identity theft with my daughter and have a understanding of who owns the photos etc etc
-
You either accept his apology or you don't . I have been told so does the girl.
If you don't believe that, proof may be that she did not want to press charges when she was under so much pressure to do so.
I would hope that players and others have heard the message that this is not acceptable .
A question , how would anyone know it was her if she handbrake come forward( not saying it's ok)
On another note, why does the AFL seem to think they have the right to be involved in any social issue that has nothing to do with football?
-
Interesting read this topic
If she consented and it appears she did
Who actually owned /owns the photo ?
N.Broad
Big issue were the ones who then re texted it after it was originally forwarded to others
Refer to his well worded press conference
“ please stop from forwarding this pic on “
Have spoken to many involved with “ withholding the law “ and it appears RFC suspension would have more to do with Club and society values rather than breaking the law
Otherwise the police would pursue this matter further is they had a concrete case
Only my opinion
Have had similar issue recently with identity theft with my daughter and have a understanding of who owns the photos etc etc
While I understand your point about photo ownership. No one is disputing she consented for the photo to be taken, that has never been in dispute.
But the main legal issue here is and has always been about the consent to publish the photo, which Broad never had. He has admitted this. In many discussions I have had about this mess it has been made very clear to me from those in the legal know that doing this is illegal, no ifs, buts or maybes.
The whys and why nots pertaining to the end of the police investigation were also explained to me in that if the person who made the complaint withdraws their complaint or ask for it not to continue then the police have little alternative than to drop it no matter how strong the evidence may or may not be. Reason being is that the complainant not wanting to continue means they are not likely to testify in the case if it gets to court; weakens a case rightly or wrongly.
I back my legal friends "advice' on this every day of the week.
Yes the club suspension is likely based around in part society values, respect and responsibility but at the end of the day IMHO it was a light punishment.
We all have a view on it, we are all entitled to have one and we are all entitled to voice it but we aren't all going to agree on it
-
On another note, why does the AFL seem to think they have the right to be involved in any social issue that has nothing to do with football?
Because whether we agree or not, like it or not in this day and age they have influence in society
It comes with being the biggest sport in the country - footballers influence kids that's a reality. So stupid footballers behaving badly is not a good thing
And then there is of course the one thing that we all sometimes forget. And that is they like all sports get funding from govts. Any govt funding comes with conditions, do you not think that sporting organisations are not going to do anything they can to protect that funding
Again not saying it is right or wrong but it is one of the realities of sport
-
Dazza lost me when he said that he was in a "sardonic mood" and writing with a fountain pen in Macquarie street. W.A.N.K.E.R. Of the highest order. Doesn't know all the facts and from his high position is making judgements. Hate these holier than thou pricks. Get a stuffing life.
Dazza is a lawyer. Think he is allowed to make judgements from a legal perspective ;D
Personally thought it was a interesting read
Seriously i don't get the angst just becasue people give an opinion that others dont like. Why resort to playing the man / woman and not the ball
Having read eveyrthing, done some reasearch of the law, spoken / discussed with numerous folks, taken a step back to take my Tiger coloured glasses off I reckon Broad got off very lightly.
I get peoples want to protect one of their own but it doesn't excuse for a second the legality let alone the stupidity of what happened here
Before the club penalty my view was he shouldn't cop too harsh of a whack but that changed after lots of robust discussion with a couple of people.
There is actually a sentence in Dazza's article that highlights one of reasons my view changed. And it relates to using being drunk as being an excuse. Agree with Dazza it's cowardly but all too common these days. We here it around "coward punches", etc. It is no excuse
Whack away
Prima facie Dazzas comments are correct but he was and is not fully informed of the facts so what he says is conjecture. Simple fact is that Broad was not the only person to text the photo. Not even the first. Secondly the debate is how much damage to the girls reputation was there actually when she wasn't identified. Thirdly she didn't want to make a complaint so there can be no offence, and lastly it was in no way "revenge porn" by the definition of the law.
Morally wrong? Yes. Was it an offence. Could not be proven or even argued on the known facts, and the unknown facts even less so. I have a little information that I won't share on this public forum, but suffice to say Broad was not the only one at fault.
-
I do not agree that the penalty was light.
If Broad was NOT on match payments it would have been very light. However, he is on approximately $6K per match, which means he is being fined about $18K. Add that to the public admission and humiliation that entails and it is about the harshest penalty imposed on a player in recent times. The maximum amount a player can be fined is $5K. Hodge never missed a match for his drink driving and he was actually charged. There were no charges here laid although there was a veiled threat by the police that they my reopen the case.
I think it was an appropriate penalty and Darren Kane has not looked into it well enough to make an informed comment.
-
Have to agree with the last two posters.
A lot of conjecture and guessing where the facts aren't known and people as usual carrying on like pork chops with the righteous fury of the political correct society we live in.
On a side note I hope Broad is doing Ok, this would be taking a toll on him and is only exacerbated by the idiots in the media and social media.
-
You miss the point if a footballer is involved then it is football related.
I don't remember voting for the AFL , they should concentrate on football not politics
-
Dazza lost me when he said that he was in a "sardonic mood" and writing with a fountain pen in Macquarie street. W.A.N.K.E.R. Of the highest order. Doesn't know all the facts and from his high position is making judgements. Hate these holier than thou pricks. Get a stuffing life.
Dazza is a lawyer. Think he is allowed to make judgements from a legal perspective ;D
Personally thought it was a interesting read
Seriously i don't get the angst just becasue people give an opinion that others dont like. Why resort to playing the man / woman and not the ball
Having read eveyrthing, done some reasearch of the law, spoken / discussed with numerous folks, taken a step back to take my Tiger coloured glasses off I reckon Broad got off very lightly.
I get peoples want to protect one of their own but it doesn't excuse for a second the legality let alone the stupidity of what happened here
Before the club penalty my view was he shouldn't cop too harsh of a whack but that changed after lots of robust discussion with a couple of people.
There is actually a sentence in Dazza's article that highlights one of reasons my view changed. And it relates to using being drunk as being an excuse. Agree with Dazza it's cowardly but all too common these days. We here it around "coward punches", etc. It is no excuse
Whack away
Your stance is of no surprise WP, but luckily the club doesnt share your views that the penalty was light. I would think its a very harsh penalty, and in fact too harsh.
who knows why the girl withdraw her complaint, but if she did then everyone should stfu and move on unless they can produce all the facts not here say rhetoric by dazza and friends.
-
I think he got off light. Wouldn't have surprised me if he was banned for 6-12 weeks.