The Hayne Plane chronicles: Episode 482

By Matt Cleary / Expert

The Jarryd Hayne thing? Dunno. And chances are you dunno, either.

We do know is this: Hayne is innocent. Indeed he’s been proven innocent. A complaint was taken to police in May of 2016 about an alleged incident in December 2015, and no charge was brought against Hayne by the police representing the state of California.

You’re innocent until proven guilty. Thus: Hayne is innocent.

Now, however, Hayne is effectively being sued by a woman in a ‘civil suit’ which is a thing they do in America in which people can sue people for alleged wrong-doing even though the criminal justice system may have thrown out a case.

The police investigation into the Hayne case became his word against the woman’s that their sex was consensual. Police didn’t dig up enough evidence to charge him. And that was it.

And that’s where it would’ve stayed in countries other than America which has a thing in which people can still sue people even after the court, the state, declares that a person is not guilty of a thing.

In Hayne’s case, he’s being sued for “sexual battery, battery, gender violence, intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligence,” according to documents tendered by lawyers.

The young woman is alleged to have woken alone, naked, under a sheet beside a pool of blood.

Court documents say she was a virgin who suffered significant physical and emotional trauma.

Hayne’s lawyer declared: “Mr Hayne unequivocally and vehemently denies the allegations, which are the subject of the civil complaint.”

Hayne has not yet been served with any proceedings or formal complaint relating to the incident.

(AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

How Hayne’s accusers will go about proving these things when police and the court system could not, I dunno.

And you would think that if they do, and something that serious is proven, that the person goes to jail. Because the person would be proven guilty of the thing.

But not in America. There seems to be different sorts of guilty. A civil case is different from a criminal case.

The family of Nicole Simpson and her boyfriend Ron Goldman successfully sued OJ Simpson after he was not convicted, in a criminal case, of their murder because a pair of bloody gloves didn’t fit and Johnny Cochrane convinced enough people on a jury that the prosecuting detective, Mark Fuhrman, was racist and may have planted the bloody gloves.

How that got The Juice off the murder wrap given bloody gloves, bloody-soled shoes, incidents of wife-beating, and an unknown person in a sweatshirt near the scene of the crime, is one of those Only In America things.

Anyway, OJ was proven not guilty, somehow, so the families of Nicole and Ron sued OJ and OJ was ordered by another judge to pay $US33.5 million.

So he wasn’t ‘guilty’ of the double murder in one court, but he still had to pay a fine for it by order of another.

Riddle me that, America.

It’s into this wacky action that it seems our Hayne Plane – and his Parramatta Eels and our dear sweet National Rugby League with him – is headed.

And here we are and he we’ll likely stay, glued to Jarryd ‘Hayne Plane and/or Train’ Hayne, as America was to OJ and his ‘trial of the century’ in 1995.

Maybe not that glued; hard to see Hayne leading dozens of NSW Police in a low-speed pursuit down the M4 to Parramatta.

But it’s still going to be a good long shit-storm of publicity that the Eels would not have signed up for when they signed the man on.

For surely – surely? – the suits at Parramatta would’ve had no inkling that this level of negative publicity would descend upon on their club, their blue-and-gold brand, with the signing of Hayne.

You don’t plan for this. Well, they do and they don’t. The NRL and clubs have top people trained in crisis management, who’ll declare that: “The police in the United States did not proceed with any criminal proceedings but we will review the information available and continue to monitor the civil case.”

The NRL’s PR people are best practice because they’ve had plenty of practice. The Parramatta Eels have had more experience fending off bouncers than the Pommy tail-enders.

And thus they signed old mate Hayne Plane because he’s a cracker of a footy player capable of wondrous deeds, and he makes those turnstiles sing, as Wendell Sailor was fond of saying of himself.

And signing the prodigal son was a good news yarn for a club that’s had scant enough of them in recent times.

(AAP Image/Dan Peled)

And they got him for unders.

But mainly because he’s a superstar player. Get Hayne fit and firing and giving a rat’s, you can win a comp.

But thinking there wasn’t the potential for dud, soap opera-like headlines for the club and the brand and ‘the game’, and all that, with the signing of Hayne would be beyond naïve.

Hayne’s got more form than Winx. Hayne courts more headlines than Malcolm Turnbull.

Which is not his fault, unless it, you know, is. Hayne talks a bit of rubbish, on occasion. And makes what some would consider odd choices. And believes some media is out to get him. And travels to Jerusalem to get baptised, and puts it up for public consumption on the Instagram.

And so on.

All this makes him compelling viewing. And if people are compelled to view you, and thus consume media in which you appear, then the media will report the things you do, on and off the pitch, as Russell Crowe – photographed in a flannie shirt while buying a hot chicken in an Oxford Street chicken shop – would tell you.

And if Eels suits thought otherwise then the Eels need new suits.

And here we are: glued to Episode 482 of The Hayne Plane Chronicles, another juicy episode in the roller-coaster ride of this most compelling of sports people.

He’s no Juice. But he’s tasty all the same.

The Crowd Says:

2017-12-31T23:22:21+00:00

Dave_S

Guest


That’s close. But the standard of proof is beyond REASONABLE doubt. It’s possible Hayne has a twin or doppelgänger, which introduces some doubt, but it isn’t a a reasonable doubt until evidence of the twin or doppelgänger is produced in court. Let off and acquitted are the same thing. But yes, you can be acquitted in a criminal prosecution and found liable in a civil suit, on the same evidence, because the former has a higher standard of proof. In reality, though, a civil court is not going to find liability and award substantial damages without some pretty solid evidence - I don’t have experience in a similar case, but I suspect the complainant is not going to win if it’s simply down to her word against his and no other factors helping the court to weigh their respective credibility.

2017-12-31T22:55:59+00:00

Dave_S

Guest


And it’s actually proving to be a good opportunity to explain how these things work. It’s not simple or immediately obvious, for the lay person. Some of the points in the article and some of the posts are ill-conceived, but in the whole it seems like a pretty civilised discussion, to me.

2017-12-31T22:47:49+00:00

Dave_S

Guest


As it stands, he is assumed to be innocent, but in the context of the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”. ASAIK, there has been no indication that the police considered the complaint to be entirely fabricated. You and I are not even accused, so it’s fair to say our situation is not (in reality) comparable to Hayne’s. At law, in a criminal context, yes we are all equally assumed to be innocent atm. In civil suits, there are no concepts of innocence and guilt. Rather, they talk in terms of being liable or not liable for the alleged harm. So it’s quite possible (depending on how things unfold) for Hayne to be both assumed to be innocent and found to be liable.

2017-12-28T20:02:50+00:00

Chris Love

Roar Guru


Larry I was a neutral observer during that game whilst on Moreton Island in a pub full of Broncos fans. Even the Broncos fans were saying the Titans were robbed. You’re right though, they kept Hayne Quiet that night though.

2017-12-28T00:08:05+00:00

Jacko

Guest


Thats like every other game of League tho...Refs decide most games

2017-12-28T00:04:27+00:00

Jacko

Guest


Yes Chris Cairns proved his innocence twice

2017-12-28T00:03:21+00:00

Jacko

Guest


How can you be innocent of a charge when there has not been a charge?

2017-12-27T23:58:59+00:00

Jacko

Guest


Pretty hard to convict someone who is not in trouble.....He certainly did the bolt from the USA quicker than he runs the 100mtrs....lots wondered at the time why

2017-12-27T20:35:00+00:00

Squidward

Roar Rookie


Did you watch that game. Worst one sided referring I’ve ever seen. I’m surprised in didn’t result in Brisbane putting on more

2017-12-27T20:29:17+00:00

Squidward

Roar Rookie


Bingo Mitch, people just don’t like him so it’s their duty to convict him

2017-12-27T02:37:53+00:00

Hoy

Roar Guru


"deem to hard to satisfy" is a slippery slope you kick off there... You are writing as though presumption of innocence is a burdon. Be careful.

2017-12-27T01:29:39+00:00

Hoy

Roar Guru


From what I understand, the difference is that for the public prosecution, the Jury must find him guilty beyond all doubt. In a civil case, it drops to balance of probability. Is that about right someone? So that is how you can be let off for lack of evidence, or even acquited, but still be done for civil case... it is crazy though.

2017-12-26T23:27:18+00:00

BA Sports

Guest


That is the bit I would be interested to understand as well. This would be a civil case in the state of California. I would think in a criminal case, the State would have to apply to the US Federal Government (if it isn't a Federal crime being committed), and ask the Federal Government to negotiate the extradition of an accused from another country. So you have a State law enforcement who think there is no case to answer, have got to convince a Federal Law enforcement agency, who then have to convince the Australian Attorney General who would have to agree there was enough evidence to think there was a crime, and take the accused into custody. And this is a civil case, not a criminal case which must add another challenge?

2017-12-26T22:39:03+00:00

BA Sports

Guest


As it stands, he is considered as innocent of this charge as you and I are.

2017-12-26T06:28:41+00:00

Cadfael

Roar Guru


What conuses me here is that the police have dropped charging him through lack of evidence, it's a "he says, she says" situation. So no criminal offence. She is now suing Hayne in a civil court. As it is not a criminal case, I doubt there could be any extradition. Even if the civil case goes against Haynes, what can they do about it? They can find against him but can they enforce it? Unless of course he is silly enough to return to the US of A.

2017-12-24T04:57:44+00:00

Larry1950

Guest


Or the fact that the AFL tightly controls the media by way of accreditation.

2017-12-24T04:54:38+00:00

Larry1950

Guest


C'mon Chris, Titans robbed in 2016 against the Broncos? Possibly unlucky but 44-28 is not a score where you've been robbed and from my recollection Hayne didn't do much outstanding stuff in that game. Robbed is where your opposition gets a try on the seventh tackle & all the 50/50's like the cowboys against Cronulla, now that's robbed. From your staunch defence of all things Jarryd, you'd be one of those guys claiming the NFL career was an outstanding triumph.

2017-12-23T23:06:07+00:00

PanthertillIdie

Guest


Jarryd Hayne - ? yawn, yawn. The most overhyped player who’s more famous for being famous than the league ability he showed what must be over 4 years ago now. Can’t believe I’ve just written that much about Jarryd Hayne! Back to sleep now.

2017-12-23T15:30:03+00:00

Mitcher

Guest


THe NRL should kick a player out of the competition because he’s the subject of an as yet untried civil suit allegation? Or because he changed clubs? Or went to a different sport. Or just that you don’t like him? Name exactly one thing Hayne has done other than be a bit of a general tool that would warrant him being expelled from the competition.

2017-12-23T06:14:21+00:00

Concussed

Guest


So is Hayne is found not guilty is he able to counter sue? As his reputation has taken damage and potential loss of revenue from sponsorship?

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar