AFL's Dustin Martin said sorry, so why does the victim feel betrayed?John Silvester
The Age
February 6, 2016An investigation into an incident involving the Richmond ace went awry, with media magnifying the pain.[/i]
My father was a policeman who believed passionately in the rule of law. And this meant if anyone tried to interfere in the process he would become extremely cross and they would become extremely sad.
Many years ago a senior VFL figure strayed over the line when Fred was investigating a potential crime involving the football industry. The official, used to getting his own way, suggested how the case should be handled. This was a mistake.
As I was told by another source Fred (then a chief inspector) looked over his glasses and threatened to arrest a particular umpire who failed to pay sufficient free kicks to Hawthorn's Leigh Matthews the previous weekend adding, "Because if you want to do my job I will do yours."
End of conversation.
But the world has changed and senior police, like opening batsmen, are determined to build partnerships. This, in most cases, is a good thing.
Take banks for example. There were armed robberies at branches virtually every day until a massive investment in security made bank robbers nearly extinct. (This process was accelerated by the armed robbery squad, which took to shooting a few as well).
Which brings us to the AFL – a sporting body that has become much more. While other industries suffer cyclic reverses the AFL just seems to get bigger and richer. This has led some in the football world to have a somewhat inflated view of their role in the wider community.
The only area they haven't explored is space travel – although it wouldn't surprise if they decided to launch satellites to beam Cyril Rioli highlights into Outer Mongolia. (Mongolians, after all, love a good blind turn – have you seen their roads?).
Which brings us in a roundabout way to Richmond's Dustin Martin and the ugly incident with a female diner at a Windsor Japanese restaurant two months ago.
The woman, who is in the television news business, suggested that Dusty should calm down as he was behaving like a drunken prat.
The exact nature of what happened is unclear. She says Martin confronted her, waved a chopstick near her face and uttered threatening words.
He allegedly slammed his open hand against the wall near her head when she said she would complain to the club.
"I certainly did feel threatened physically and did feel in serious danger of physical harm," she would later tell stern-faced AFL investigators.
What is not in dispute is that she was frightened and he was out of control.
Now Dusty is an easy target. A footballer with neck tattoos who could pass for a bikie, he has overcome a challenging background to successfully harness his vast talent.
The victim (and she is a victim in more ways than one) did complain to Richmond and within hours Martin rang to apologise.
According to her Martin was contrite and sincere.
"He listened, he acknowledged how I felt and he was authentic. He knows he made a mistake and he has not shied away from that. As far as I was concerned after that phone call and apology the matter was over," she said.
The woman, who works for Channel Seven, gave a TV interview about the incident that went to air that night.
Martin did the wrong thing but tried to make it right. But there were others who should have known better who managed to make it much worse.
When the story grew legs the AFL launched an investigation and this is where it gets murky with conflicts aplenty. There was the desire to find the truth but at the same time there was a vested interest in protecting the welfare of the player and to look after the image of the game.
The woman was interviewed by AFL and Richmond investigators who later produced a document of her account that looks remarkably like a police statement – which is not surprising as they are ex-cops.
But the draft statement included a few strange paragraphs such as: "Whilst he genuinely frightened me, I do not consider this so much to be a 'violence against women issue' but an alcohol issue." And, "I don't personally want him to miss playing as I think that football is probably the only thing he has."
This is curious. Surely the statement should have been restricted to her recollections of the event rather than speculation on motives and preferred punishment. Or was this about brand protection rather than fact gathering?
During her dealings with some officials she felt pressured to downplay the event and says she was told details of Martin's private life that were, frankly, none of her business. So those who were trying to protect Martin, actually betrayed him. At one point she says an official remarked, "He could go to jail and lose his job."
"I was the one made to feel guilty," she says.
Eventually the matter was handed to police (she learnt on social media of the decision) but the case was already compromised. The victim, who had been subjected to online abuse, would not co-operate and while witnesses confirmed the ugly incident they did not hear the threatening words she claimed the footballer uttered.
So Martin, clearly chastened by what happened, is free to play footy. One report suggested he was "shattered" by how he was perceived. So he became the victim while in some eyes the victim became the villain.
She's left wishing she remained silent. While she was not touched by Martin she feels bruised by the AFL.
"Having known what I've experienced would I ever have reported it? Absolutely not. Why have I been subjected to what has felt like a criminal investigation by a sporting body for simply having the courage to report inappropriate behaviour?
"I was utterly dismayed to learn of the blatant backgrounding to journalists by the AFL in an attempt to discredit me" – to the point where it was just a case of "a drunk kid being silly".
"It quickly became clear that my welfare was not a priority. This is about protecting the image of a lucrative business for the AFL."
On the back of the Martin probe AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan asked Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner Kate Jenkins to review the league's Respect and Responsibility Policy and related matters.
(The commission long ago found that a prove, prosecute and punish policy such as the one used by the AFL simply doesn't work).
McLachlan is sincere in trying to change the culture and his decision to seek an outside review is the right one.
Jenkins completed a major review into sexual harassment and gender bias in the Victoria Police and recommended widespread changes. The review was commissioned by then chief commissioner Ken Lay, who has joined the Essendon Football Club board.
So Gill, here is a tip. Why don't you pinch him to join the AFL commission? He has worked tirelessly in the domestic violence area, has pushed gender reform and is an expert on process and unbiased investigations.
Which means I am telling the AFL how to do its job – which is exactly what they tried to do to my old man.
When it comes to football a large percentage of people simply lose their collective minds and no doubt some will see this as an attack on Martin.
It is not. He did the wrong thing and apologised. There is no reason to hang him out to dry.
But there will be those on (anti) social media who will have smoke coming out of their keyboards.
Indeed I feel sorry for our football writers, many of whom are subject to mindless abuse via the world wide web.
The exception is our recruiting and talent guru Emma Quayle. One fan wrote online he wanted to marry her because "she is really pretty and we could talk footy all day".
Now that is love.
We at The Age and Fairfax Media are told to engage with readers and embrace all channels of communication but personally I think the only tweet of any value comes from a canary down a coalmine.
Now it is not only the new media where people go a little nuts on footy as the mainstream can also lose its way.
Such as the case of a couple of Collingwood players who took sexually explicit selfies that were offered to the media.
Let's make this clear. The players may have been dumb but they didn't act illegally. (One was nude except for a pair of socks. Was this some strange foot fe-tish or was the floor cold? We shall never know).
From all reports the photos were sent to women consensually.
Those women appear to have provided them to Woman's Day on the proviso their identities are protected – although no doubt their names would have appeared on the once-respectable publication's chequebook.
Anonymity in the media should be used for whistleblowers, not gold diggers.
So the woman who complained about Martin is put through the wringer while those who profited from the Collingwood pictures are protected. Ain't life grand?
The two men are in relationships that may or may not be now under strain by this outrageous breach of privacy.
The publication gleefully announced its scoop with the cover blurb,
"New AFL Crisis! Players Caught in Nude Photo Scandal! The pics that will break their partners' hearts."What a pathetic way to make a living.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/afls-dustin-martin-said-sorry-so-why-does-the-victim-feel-betrayed-20160204-gmlbrd.html
