James Roberts Drama

[Brent81]

Can't contact witnesses.

She didn't see who it was.

Never fucking happened.

Just a person trying to be important...chick chick bang all over again....

 

[broncos4life]

Can't contact witnesses.

She didn't see who it was.

Never fucking happened.

Just a person trying to be important...chick chick bang all over again....

Huh? She didn't see who it was?

 

[Unbreakable]

I must admit, a small part of me wants us to keep him and just smack him with every ban we possibly can (No booze, no clubbing, no sneezing without our say so), purely because he's so fucking fast and talented.

Another part of me wants us to kick him to the curb and say good luck.

I'm conflicted.

 

[Mitch06]

Huh? She didn't see who it was?

There's a rumour going around that she had no clue who pulled her hair but it was her friends who told her it was James Roberts. Just a comment I read on Facebook...probably worth nothing.

 

[Brent81]

Huh? She didn't see who it was?

Courier Mail says "The 23-year-old woman did not see who it was that pulled her hair but claimed two men she was with alleged it was Roberts."

 

[Brent81]

There's a rumour going around that she had no clue who pulled her hair but it was her friends who told her it was James Roberts. Just a comment I read on Facebook...probably worth nothing.

More than a facebook rumour mate.

 

[Mitch06]

More than a facebook rumour mate.

Thanks mate, I hadn't come across it!

 

[broncos4life]

Sue the bitch for defamation.

 

[Super Freak]

7 say Broncs want a booze and nightclub ban. Nightclub incident is not proven. IU not happy about him lying about the drunk diversion. Decision may be tomorrow.

I can't see them sacking him, to be honest.

There is no proof. He lied about the drunk diversion but it looks like there was no alcohol or night club ban. Now there are reports that the woman didn't even see who it was.

If they sack him, that's grounds for unfair dismissal, isn't it?

 

[Sirlee oldman]

Sue the bitch for defamation.

You can't do that. She didn't make a complaint and was completely upfront from the start that she didn't see or recognise him. It was the two guys with her that identified Roberts. That was clear from the beginning. What isn't clear is whether the guys that were with her have been interviewed. Don't get me wrong I don't want to lose him but a serious investigation would have included the people who were reported to be witnesses.

 

[Brent81]

I can't see them sacking him, to be honest.

There is no proof. He lied about the drunk diversion but it looks like there was no alcohol or night club ban. Now there are reports that the woman didn't even see who it was.

If they sack him, that's grounds for unfair dismissal, isn't it?

He can't he's over the income threshold and not covered by an industrial instrument.

This will come down to what Brisbane want to do. If they wanted to punt him they probably have enough to say he's brought the game in disrepute. Probably.

If they don'r want to punt him, I don't think they will have to.

What disturbs me (reading the courier mail article) is the line about investigators not being able to build a case. Some needs to tell IU that's not their job. They are there to work out what happened, not to build a case for or against anyone.

As I have said earlier IU needs its wings clipped. And bloody soon.

 

[Brent81]

You can't do that. She didn't make a complaint and was completely upfront from the start that she didn't see or recognise him. It was the two guys with her that identified Roberts. That was clear from the beginning. What isn't clear is whether the guys that were with her have been interviewed. Don't get me wrong I don't want to lose him but a serious investigation would have included the people who were reported to be witnesses.

You wouldn't sue.

A defamation action gives the alleged perpetrator of the defamation a forum to repeat the allegation over and over again.

 

[Super Freak]

He can't he's over the income threshold and not covered by an industrial instrument.

This will come down to what Brisbane want to do. If they wanted to punt him they probably have enough to say he's brought the game in disrepute. Probably.

If they don'r want to punt him, I don't think they will have to.

What disturbs me (reading the courier mail article) is the line about investigators not being able to build a case. Some needs to tell IU that's not their job. They are there to work out what happened, not to build a case for or against anyone.

As I have said earlier IU needs its wings clipped. And bloody soon.

I don't see why he can't?

Todd Carney took the Sharks to court for unfair dismissal.

 

[Brent81]

I don't see why he can't?

Todd Carney took the Sharks to court for unfair dismissal.

No.

He sued for breach of contract. Different beast.

He was saying that he should have been given a chance to address the board.

As I understand it Judgment hasn't been handed down yet.

 

[broncos4life]

You can't do that. She didn't make a complaint and was completely upfront from the start that she didn't see or recognise him. It was the two guys with her that identified Roberts. That was clear from the beginning. What isn't clear is whether the guys that were with her have been interviewed. Don't get me wrong I don't want to lose him but a serious investigation would have included the people who were reported to be witnesses.

Of course you can sue her, whether she made a police complaint is irrelevant.

She went to the papers to claim he assaulted her without actually knowing is that was the case. That's defamation.

 

[Sirlee oldman]

Of course you can sue her, whether she made a police complaint is irrelevant.

She went to the papers to claim he assaulted her without actually knowing is that was the case. That's defamation.

You don't know that. First of all the papers probably went to her and right from the start she didn't claim Roberts did anything. She claimed that her hair was pulled and her friends identified Roberts as the culprit. It was right there in her initial comments to the media.

 

[Kimlo]

No.

He sued for breach of contract. Different beast.

He was saying that he should have been given a chance to address the board.

As I understand it Judgment hasn't been handed down yet.

How sure are you? Based on what you're saying, the club can sack them (as in any player) for any reason without recourse? Or are you saying he can only argue for a breach of contract and not unfair dismissal?

 

[Brent81]

How sure are you? Based on what you're saying, the club can sack them (as in any player) for any reason without recourse? Or are you saying he can only argue for a breach of contract and not unfair dismissal?

Your second point is what I am saying.

Although now I am thinking about it, I am less certain as to whether the EBA with the RLPA might not give him coverage.

I am pretty sure he's not covered though.