Quade Cooper trial - the result
- Thread starter Gagger
- Start date
- Status
Easy on the higher moral ground there people.
I don't hate QC (Quade Cooper) - think he's one of the best attacking talents to happen in Aussie rugby for a long time. Interviewed him last year, seemed like an authentically nice kid.
However, something involving computers and a students flat getting broken into by him happened; it's been mediated and the ARU has fined him for it.
I believe in a society with free speech and so I think people should be able to comment on this, even speculate. I don't believe anyone in this thread deliberately spread malicious rumours - it's called debate and sharing of information.
You take speculation out of the internet and you'll get left with porn.
I don't hate QC (Quade Cooper) - think he's one of the best attacking talents to happen in Aussie rugby for a long time. Interviewed him last year, seemed like an authentically nice kid.
However, something involving computers and a students flat getting broken into by him happened; it's been mediated and the ARU has fined him for it.
I believe in a society with free speech and so I think people should be able to comment on this, even speculate. I don't believe anyone in this thread deliberately spread malicious rumours - it's called debate and sharing of information.
You take speculation out of the internet and you'll get left with porn.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
RedsHappy and Godfrey, it would be hypocritical to apply one standard to league and another standard to union. I'm applying the same standard to both and I'm finding both Quade and this process very worrying.
Just because he's a terrific player doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to indiscretions. That's how they do it in league, and what I find so appalling about their player culture.
Just because he's a terrific player doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to indiscretions. That's how they do it in league, and what I find so appalling about their player culture.
Tiger
Alfred Walker (16)
This is all a bit of a mess isn't it?
I can't recall the exact wording, but I think the Courier Mail article I read today said that the complainants were the ones who asked for money, initially $45k. Not great form, I think, if they were the ones shopping for a payout to shut up.
Not sure if I can blame QC (Quade Cooper) for paying under those circumstances: even if you think you'll be found not guilty, why spend an amount close to that to take it to trial and roll the dice when the complainant is saying they'll walk away for $45k? Even if you come out innocent you'll still stink.
Bottom line, I think, is that this is a bloody mess and it's hard to tell who's actually in the wrong and by how much.
There's the rumour that there were actually no laptops and it was all an insurance scam... but then there are the rumours about there being nasty stuff on the laptops... and then there's the rumours about the drink spiking... and then there's the rumours about Quade Cooper being a sleeper agent and the residents of the apartment being ex-KGB...
I can't recall the exact wording, but I think the Courier Mail article I read today said that the complainants were the ones who asked for money, initially $45k. Not great form, I think, if they were the ones shopping for a payout to shut up.
Not sure if I can blame QC (Quade Cooper) for paying under those circumstances: even if you think you'll be found not guilty, why spend an amount close to that to take it to trial and roll the dice when the complainant is saying they'll walk away for $45k? Even if you come out innocent you'll still stink.
Bottom line, I think, is that this is a bloody mess and it's hard to tell who's actually in the wrong and by how much.
There's the rumour that there were actually no laptops and it was all an insurance scam... but then there are the rumours about there being nasty stuff on the laptops... and then there's the rumours about the drink spiking... and then there's the rumours about Quade Cooper being a sleeper agent and the residents of the apartment being ex-KGB...
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
I agree. I've been involved in a few business arguments over the years and my lawyers' advice has always been to settle. Even if you think you have a clear win, it's still a lottery. Quade's downside from losing the case would be a lot more then any settlement - literally millions. It doesn't mean he's guilty: it just means he has prudent lawyers.
Very true. In my field, medical indemnity cases were often settled in the past regardless of the right or wrong of them, as the insurers were better off than pursuing the cases through the courts. Not so much the case now, since tort law reform in NSW anyway. Nonetheless, I know of colleagues who were "pushed" to settle against their principles for the sake of a cheaper outcome. Expensive stuff, litigation.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Tiger, whatever we end up believing on this matter, let's not for goodness sake take what's speculated or argued in Courier-Mail as fact or as the baseline truth from which all conclusions or inferences should derive. It is far from a newspaper of consistent, reliable quality, and like all papers at this end of the spectrum, it has a vested interest in drama and celebrity-stirring. And just the very latest speculation - that the claimants may have asked for money, etc - shows just how complicated (or not reported at all) the real truth of these matters could be.
Many posters here seem to have unequivocally convinced themselves that QC (Quade Cooper) is the clear 'at fault' party in all or most respects. The truth may well be far more complicated. The important point is that we don't know anything like the full facts, and those that do are a very small group bound (now) by a court supervised confidentiality agreement.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Scarf, of course, I agree, we apply the same standards to all codes, or we should! My argument with you is this: unless you have the important _verified_ facts that really cover the entire spectrum of this case in detail - from all perspectives, not just the claimants' - I struggle to understand how you could so confidently 'find both Quade and this process very worrying'. I would not say that for one minute if QC (Quade Cooper) had been successfully prosecuted at court and found guilty of an offence. A court and police-driven process, whilst not perfect, is infinitely more fair and reliable than media write-ups, half-facts, speculation, 'i heard from a source', the 'Courier-Mail has stated', etc.
For me, this is about equitable fairness of process, and a party being innocent until proven guilty at court based upon a full suite of facts presented at court. Judging people's character and actions on media reports - that can be notoriously unreliable, biassed and incomplete - is not, ultimately, a 'fair go'.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
OK - I'll finish up by asking you, RH, what would have happened if the alleged break and enter / thief was too poor for a payout? For me, payouts should be for civil cases, not criminal cases. Anyway, let's hope QC (Quade Cooper) has learnt his lesson one way or another and we can move on. Best of luck to him for the future.
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
Scarfman, I think the payout was purely for the civil matter of damages, since that is the limit of the powers of the arbitration system. My understanding was the the police declined to press charges on the criminal matter due to their inability to establish intent.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
yep all sounds good except why the confidentiality bit? There would be no speculation on whether he is a thief or got so drunk that he is considered not responsible for his actions.(yes I acknowledge murmurs of drink spiking......happens to me evertime i go on a bender as well!)
I'm ok with the fact that he mediated & there was a consensus between all parties as to the resolution. don't care that he might have paid the victims to make it go away. i do care when it is made confidential & we are told he should be given the benefit of the doubt. innocent before being found guilty etc and that we have no right to speculate on what might have happened.
He clearly prefers speculation than to have the facts on the record. That says it all for me.
Groucho
Greg Davis (50)
I like to watch, confidentiality is to protect both sides. We don't (and probably won't) ever know who requested it. It may have been requested by the alleged victims, especially if they got a financial payout for purely pragmatic reasons.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
yeah I believe that he didn't request the confidentiality,as much as I believe he was the victim of drink spiking.
Nusadan
Chilla Wilson (44)
It's quite possible QC (Quade Cooper) later claimed drink spiking and then his solicitor used that to say that the police cannot disprove it as they didn't take blood tests off him soon enough after the alleged offence? Then they thus have less of a leg to stand on...
All pure speculation, mind you, on my part...and am all for innocent until found guilty...
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
+1. Or, just as a perhaps and purely speculative but nonetheless quite possible, the claimants/'victims' had pertinent other, not payout related, facts of the matter that they wished not revealed.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Scarf, thanks for fair feedback. I assume you would like me to attempt an answer.
First, has it been properly verified that in fact QC (Quade Cooper) definitely made a payout in some form of compensation, or is that just dear ol' JT (or others) in the Courier Mail + ' a source has said...'? I note you have assumed this as now an established fact.
Anyway, your question is good, so let's assume for this discussion some form of payout (even if we don't know precisely why it was made). The question then, logically is: did that payout arise as the base for the whole 'solution' to the matter, or did it essentially arise, say, because the 'victims' or their lawyers knew from the start QC (Quade Cooper) was a man of means and they could likely extract that payout in mediation? This is pertinent, in that, in the case of a poorer person, it may well be that the alleged victims' lawyers know that no resolution can involve $s as there are none of size to give, and, say, an apology is adequate to deal with the matter. However, assuming that, for the moment, a payment _is_ material and sine qua non to a mediated outcome and that that outcome was wholly dependent upon that payment being made, then, in those 'pure' circumstances, you have above the makings of a very sound point, which, as principle, I would concur with.
However, I would argue that in practice the matter could well be more complex, for example only, the prosecution authorities may well have supported a mediated outcome for some reason associated with the facts of the matter and they may have adduced a scenario like: 'there are sound technical and legal reasons why we are reluctant for a full prosecution to take place as it could fail, or the claimants' case has suddenly weakened as it's been examined more closely (this can and does happen in a legal process), and we therefore encourage the claimant to accept a payment from this party of means to compensate for hurt and potential damages, etc'. In a case with a poorer accused, they may well have taken the same approach and just potentially said a formal apology should suffice plus a police warning to not offend again. Thus, the precise circumstances are very important wrt the role or otherwise of 'payments in compensation'.
Tiger
Alfred Walker (16)
Fair call - agreed.
T
TOCC
Guest
im not suggesting its people on here, but there are obviously people out there in the rugby community who dislike Quade, even here in QLD(shock horror) i have spoken to plenty of people who cant stand him, they dont like his fancy passes and his goofy step.
In saying that, you really see those people come out of the woodwork when something like this case happens, those who secretly brood over quade quickly jump on the first negative snippet or rumour and ride it. The very same people who are generally dissmissive about 'rumours' or 'tabloid articles' are now using them as the base of there argument against Quade. Its rather pathetic IMO
In saying that, you really see those people come out of the woodwork when something like this case happens, those who secretly brood over quade quickly jump on the first negative snippet or rumour and ride it. The very same people who are generally dissmissive about 'rumours' or 'tabloid articles' are now using them as the base of there argument against Quade. Its rather pathetic IMO
- Status