Judiciary - You're Verdict

[mountainsofpain]

I don't understand. Linsen presented to a hearing and a verdict was given. I can understand if a MRP offers Linsen a sentence without a hearing and this is appealed by the league. How can a player be tried for the same offense twice? Isn't the judiciary appointed by the league? How can you appeal yourself?

Linsen isn't being tried twice - he's already been found guilty and that verdict isn't in question. It is the sentence which is being appealed.

The tribunal is an independent body. What is happening now is no different to what happens with the legal system in NSW. If the DPP isn't happy with a sentence handed down by the courts, it appeals.

[justabaraker]

Linsen isn't being tried twice - he's already been found guilty and that verdict isn't in question. It is the sentence which is being appealed.

The tribunal is an independent body. What is happening now is no different to what happens with the legal system in NSW. If the DPP isn't happy with a sentence handed down by the courts, it appeals.

No argument with you Mountains but, ahhhhhhhh, Kevvy ain't gonna be happy - his club will be in direct conflict with the ruling body. Those raparound sunglasses of his will be melting from the heat of the steam coming out of his ears !

[Coastal Boy]

APPEALS
7.1 Findings of fact and determination of penalty shall be final except that:
7.1.1 the tribunal may, in its discretion, re open any hearing for the purpose of considering fresh evidence (but not for the purpose of reconsidering any finding made or penalty imposed on the basis of previously presented evidence);
7.1.1.1 fresh evidence means evidence which was not known to be available, and could not, with reasonable diligence, have been known to have been available at the time of the original hearing;
NOTE: The test here is important, for it is not sufficient that the new evidence was just not presented at the first hearing. An example would be wanting to call fresh evidence from another witness who is, say, a trainer or club official and who could have been interviewed before the original hearing. This would not satisfy the test. An example of what would satisfy the test is belated awareness that a spectator had taken a private recording of the incident but had not communicated this fact to the club prior to the hearing.
7.1.2
appears that even if presented to the original hearing, the fresh evidence could not reasonably be expected to have resulted in a different finding or penalty.
the tribunal shall not re-open any hearing to consider fresh evidence where it appears that even if presented to the original hearing, the fresh evidence could not reasonably be expected to have resulted in a different finding or penalty.

7.2 An appeal from any decision on a point of law or procedure only may be made to the AFL (NSW/ACT) on such conditions as that body shall determine.
NOTE: It is important to distinguish between an appeal and a re-hearing. Persons without legal training usually talk about the former when they really mean the latter.
A re-hearing simply means recycling the same evidence before another body of persons in the hope that (even though the first hearing made no procedural errors) the second hearing might be persuaded to come to a different view of the facts. There is neither need, nor provision under these rules, for any re-hearing.
An appeal is directed to correcting some error of procedure or law which may have been made in the original hearing and affected its findings. Examples are failure to give proper notice of a hearing, wrongly admitting or excluding certain evidence, misinterpreting a by-law etc. ?Error? in this sense does not include a belief by the unsuccessful party that the ultimate decision is wrong. It is not the result but the path to that result which matters and if the tribunal has followed the correct procedures the mere fact that it has believed one witness and disbelieved another in arriving at a conclusion is not an ?error? which provides grounds for an appeal.

[Coastal Boy]

I appreciate and accept your comments Mountains and Just. I copied this from the leagues website regarding appeals. It was difficult to find so I opted to copy it. I could be wrong but I can't see grounds for appeal in this section and the first few lines clearly state otherwise. Especially as the league is not questioning law or procedure but purely the leniency of the sentence. Can anyone think of a precedent of the league appealing a decision?

[floppinab]

The SydneyAFL's advocate at the first hearing would've suggested or requested a penalty??? Anyone know what that was??

Not sure what they are looking for here, 12 games?, a full season?? I seem to remember a similar one to this last year that got 8 weeks off the back of a club citing.

They often take the impact on the player hit into account (I don't necessarily agree with that but it always seems to have an impact on the penalty) and I gather the Easts player wasn't too badly hurt.
I thought they maybe could've gone to maybe 8/9 tops but regardless it didn't seem too far out of line of similar incidents we have seen in the past. His previous record was pretty clean I think, if that is taken into account.

[unconfuseme]

What tf are these people trying to prove?

It was a bad look, it's provided unwanted head lines, it's been dealt with appropriately, it was done and dusted and yesterday's news ... and now they just drag it back into the spotlight!!!

Should we expect anything more from the Keystone Kops? ... NFI



... and has #31 been brought up on striking charges based on the clear video evidence ....?

[felix]

The AFL(NSW/ACT )by-laws and regulations clearly state that "Appeals from Tribunal findings arising out of on field offences may only be lodged where there is evidence of an error of law or procedure."
This in itself disallows an appeal over the length of sentence decided upon by a properly convened tribunal.
When you look at the Reece Conca incident on national television getting 2 weeks then a 7 game sentence for this incident seems more than adequate.
And the AFL does appoint its independent tribunal as opposed to the DPP who do not appoint the court adjudicators.
I would not be surprised if the AFL is tampering with its By Laws in order to get an appeal up.
I have just noted that the AFL SYDNEY by laws have been last modified on 26/8/14 (TODAY) at 10.53 and for some reason can not be downloaded on my computer while I have no trouble downloading any other documents.
Very interesting

[Coastal Boy]

Are they really going to change the by-laws because they called for an appeal which is illegal under their own rules?? Wow!!

The whole event of recent days only serves to highlight that
a) the Sydney AFL deem that the tribunal which they appoint is incompetent; and
b) the Sydney AFL will lower themself to whatever level is necessary to achieve a result.

I know many people may not be surprised by either of these statements but I sincerely hope that this is not happening. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[goodnut]

Interesting one coming out of the weekends game between Pennant Hills and St George. Go to the 1 hr 15 sec mark. Young Mudge will be in a bit of trouble by the looks of it

AFL Sydney Qualifying Final - Pennant Hills v St George - YouTube

[justabaraker]

Interesting one coming out of the weekends game between Pennant Hills and St George. Go to the 1 hr 15 sec mark. Young Mudge will be in a bit of trouble by the looks of it

Oh dear...after what we've seen over the past couple of weeks, you'd reckon a player would be more careful when he knows that there are cameras in the area....

[Tom Wills]

What was he thinking, at least in the Linsen incident there is arguably some provocation (albeit very minor). I looked at it and just cant see any reason why he did it?

[The Runt]

Just had a look, be interesting to see how fair dinkum Sydney AFL is. I think Linsen was crucified due to the amount of media coverage, will be interesting to see if they react to this in the same manner to a blantant cheap shot.

[Nuttsy]

Wonder if this one will end up on MMM?????????????? The only difference with this and the Linsen one is the player is facing him. In saying that i reckon he still wasnt expecting an elbow to the face, which i reckon is worse, and as the Run said theres no provacation at all.

[unconfuseme]

Interesting one coming out of the weekends game between Pennant Hills and St George. Go to the 1 hr 15 sec mark. Young Mudge will be in a bit of trouble by the looks of it

AFL Sydney Qualifying Final - Pennant Hills v St George - YouTube

Thanks for your contribution mate!

So I expect you will be able to go back through every tape of every single game in every grade, including women's and u/19's and bring every single illegal action by a player to light for this and maybe the past 5 or 6 seasons, so that all of those players who were not dealt with on the ground can be brought to justice?

... or is this it!?

[Tim Freedman]

Thanks for your contribution mate!

So I expect you will be able to go back through every tape of every single game in every grade, including women's and u/19's and bring every single illegal action by a player to light for this and maybe the past 5 or 6 seasons, so that all of those players who were not dealt with on the ground can be brought to justice?

... or is this it!?

Agreed - I didn't realise we had the general public reviewing game tapes to sight players these days.

How about we leave this with the Sydney AFL to deal with how they see fit. I would hate for another young bloke to go through the type of social media and general media scrutiny and bullying that Marcus Linsen was subjected to. That IMO was totally out of control and I haven't seen any player at local or state level ever subjected to that type of coverage. He deserved his 7 weeks but certainly didn't deserve everything that went with it.

Young Jessie has clearly done the wrong thing but he is a young player who will hopefully learn a lesson from it. If he is suspended then I'm sure he will know that he has let his team mates down during finals time. From what I have seen of him (which isn't much) he would be in their top 10 players so they certainly need him playing. Would be an interesting discussion at the dinner table if he is suspended......