Dylan Walker found not guilty, NRL issue statement

On an article about Dylan Walker?

The Roar is fortunate to have contributors with the experience and intellect to attract such stimulating debate. Particular thanks to Mushi for his 6:40 and 10:13 posts.

This just goes to show the Kangaroo Court justice we can expect from a man who considers consistency over rated. Walker served a 9 game suspension and was found not guilty. Chee Kam served a 2 game suspension (by Wests not by the NRL) and he is found guilty of an offence. Yeh Mr Greenberg, you really are showing the people of the game how fair and impartial you are. Shameful and just shows what a foolish system this 'no fault' policy is, which has been heavily criticised for the start. But you know best, Mr Greenberg, don't you.

Nailed it on the first sentence Barry...he is a rubbish bloke. The stand down policy is fine.

There's literally no point in having any off field disciplinary process under that thought process.

Whilst not saying this is what happened here it is an overarching issue. A victim of a well paid offender who has a claim on the offenders income (partnership or children) is economically incentivised for them to avoid anything which jeopardises that income. Similar issues were raised around on the Ray Rice episode in the NFL. The punishment from the league was more about protecting the social licence that sport relies on than the potential offender/victim.

Agree with you. He's been found not guilty but she's received the penalty, she's got to live with him.

There's no perfect system.

In Todd Carney’s case: 1. there was photographic evidence; 2. he admitted to performin act; and 3. he was never subject to the no fault stand down policy; So I’m not sure how Todd Carney is relevant to a discussion about a policy where players are compulsorily stood down after being charged with a criminal offence.

People often confuse the verdict of not guilty as being the same as innocent. It simply means the incident could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Once the woman changed her statement, there was no way a guilty verdict could be achieved. Really, you can't blame her - to live comfortably or to go out solo with a child to support, promises that it would never happen again - it's a difficult situation.

You have summed it up in the first sentence. Being found not guilty in a court of law doesn't make him innocent.

A court decision is determinative on whether a crime in law can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Todd Carney never spent a day in prison yet he isn’t playing in the NRL for good reason. Work it out.

I find it amazing how many people seem to think not being found guilty of a criminal offence means they aren't a grub...I know plenty of awful people who haven't been convicted of anything.

I wasn't in court and haven't heard the whole story just like you. That's the simple point you and others don't seem to get. I'm accepting the courts have got it right after hearing the whole story and you are telling me they've got it wrong after you have heard one side of the story in the media. You are suggesting that we ignore what the judge says and listen to your amateur verdict. Hilarious .

JDBs case is very different. There are no witnesses other than the people who were directly involved. There was no recorded triple 0 call. I haven’t made up my mind about him at all, other than it is better for the NRL for him to not be playing during all of this. I’ve never made any comment about his guilt. Who’s twisting words now? But in Walker’s case there were eyewitnesses, there was a recorded 000 call. There was objective evidence of what happened. The magistrate (or judge) didn’t agree with Walker’s evidence. At all. That’s just not how the system works and you’re embarrassing yourself with this immature opinion that a not guilty verdict means the “judge” agreed with Walker. The court findings mean there was insufficient evidence to find Walker guilty. That’s it. It doesn’t mean the court sided with Walker or “agreed” with him. And that’s happened simply because his partner changed her story of what happened from what she told police and what she was recorded saying on the 000 call. Once she did that her version of events is different from the witnesses so of course it won’t stick. It doesn’t mean it didn’t happen but you’re happily ignoring everything other than the verdict. Hope you enjoy cheering for Walker...

I think the performance bonuses should be protected at the very least including a scale on rep payments.

As grey hand points out supporting the employer is hardly social justice. I'm still on board with it (though having Beattie and Greenberg execute it worries me more than a little) being found innocent was an assumed outcome, otherwise it wouldn't be a stand down. I believe an organisation has a right to reasonably act to protect the brand for all stakeholders and at times this won't align with the individual. This to me is still the most reasonable compromise which balances the good of both sides, though they could look at adjustments to satisfy the concerns around future earnings where no disciplinary action is taken post trial.

I did focus on what happened in court when the player gave his side of the story. His side of the story was I didn’t grab her by the hair and drag her to the ground like she told the 000 operator, like she told police who first responded and as multiple witnesses saw. I touched her shoulder and she fell over. You’re wilfully ignoring everything else that happened and focusing ONLY on the verdict. When asked your opinion on anything other than the verdict you rattle on with nonsense about needing “magical powers” to deduce information. He got off the charges because his partner changed her story, because she wanted to stay with him. That’s it. Not because he didn’t do it. I’ve thought you were naive before with this head in the sand, immature black and white view of only the court decides what happened. I think it’s something a little worse when you’ll wilfully ignore the whole story, other than the verdict so you can excuse a person for domestic violence just because he plays for your team.

Our adversarial court system does not profess to be a truth-finder. It’s a logistical process. None of our opinions “matter,” as you put it. Isn’t this simply a discussion?

I wanted to stay sileybut let me just say for the record as one that was there and has nothing to gain,o know what I saw there is no justice only good people who may have been lying for no apparent reason.