No show from Dank today.
-------------------------------------------
STEPHEN Dank's appeal against a lifetime sports ban has been adjourned until December 1 after the controversial sports scientist failed to attend a hearing of the AFL Appeals Board on Monday.
Dank sent an email on Sunday requesting his appeal be adjourned because a family member was in hospital with a life-threatening condition.
Despite submissions from the AFL and ASADA on Monday that Dank's appeal be dismissed, the Appeals Board adjourned the appeal to next Thursday on the condition Dank provided supporting documentation from his ill relative's hospital and treating doctor by Friday, November 25.
During Monday's hearing, counsel for ASADA, Patrick Knowles, said Dank had a history of non-compliance and despite being given "umpteen chances" by the Appeal Board was either not willing or didn't intend to appear at his appeal.
Knowles called for Dank's appeal to be dismissed for want of prosecution, urging the Appeals Board not to grant him "another indulgence".
Counsel for the AFL, Renee Enbom, submitted Dank's appeal should be dismissed on the basis of his continued failures to appear at hearings and meet evidentiary deadlines.
"There's no court in the state who would have tolerated the way Dank has conducted his case," Enbom said.
Enbom also said the 34 past and present Essendon players suspended for the 2016 season as a result of the 2012 supplements program overseen by Dank deserved some closure.
"It's time to bring this process to an end. Everyone, including the players, is entitled to some finality," Enbom said.
Dank was found guilty of 10 breaches of the AFL's anti-doping code in April last year.
He was subsequently banned for life from working in any sport in Australia or overseas by the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal.
Dank's attempt to have the ban overturned had been scheduled for a three-day hearing at AFL House from Monday.
The appeals board issued a statement on Friday to clarify Dank's rights at the open hearing after a Fairfax Media report stated only written submissions would be allowed.
"The statement contained in the article that oral submissions (and by inference that oral evidence) would not be allowed at the hearing of Mr Dank's appeal is totally incorrect," the statement from board members Peter O'Callaghan QC, Murray Kellam AO and Geoff Giudice AO read.
"All parties shall be entitled to call and rely upon such oral or written evidence as is relevant and make such oral or written submissions as they consider appropriate."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-11-21/dank-set-to-face-appeals-board-over-lifetime-ban
