UN-NAMED Freo Official !!

Eastern · Post: # 437925Post **Eastern** » Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:24pm

Who is the un-named Freemantle official whose eye witness account of the Baker-Farmer incident has sent the matter direct to the tribunal?

I know how much I'd believe someone who doesn't have the courage to put their name to their allegations !!

Riewoldting · Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:26pm

What makes you think they haven't put their name forward?

Eastern · Post: # 437930Post **Eastern** » Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:28pm

Riewoldting wrote:What makes you think they haven't put their name forward?

If they did, their name would be out in the public domain by now. Hutchy would be trying to get an interview for FC tonight !!

Riewoldting · Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:34pm

They don't put their name forward independently to the tribunal - they are a witness for Fremantle, so Fremantle calls them. I don't know at what stage parties have to notify the tribunal as to the names of witnesses, but I'd suggest that if the tribunal has been given a name, it is not in public domain because everyone is keeping their mouth shut about their identity, and correctly so.

saintspremiers · Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:35pm

HIS name is Adrian Anderson.

Does it need to be a Freo official, or is that spin for an AFL official???

saint patrick · Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:36pm

Mark Harvey or Cameron Schwab perhaps

...now theres a couple of credible,unbiased witnesses

brown-coat · Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:42pm

Lee Harvey Oswald.

WHAT THE f***.

BAKER RULZ.

rexy · Post: # 437955Post **rexy** » Mon 20 Aug 2007 10:45pm

They are not a witness for fremantle, they are a witness for the AFL. The Fremantle footy club is not charging Baker the AFL is.

supersaints · Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:10am

A trainer, they also say he is a school teacher (don't think that gives any credibility I know a few school teachers who are bulls*** artists.

riccardo · Post: # 438129Post **riccardo** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:12am

Mr Nobody is my guess.

cowboy18 · Post: # 438133Post **cowboy18** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:22am

My source says that it is this guy.

Grimfang · Post: # 438138Post **Grimfang** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:28am

So Cameron Schwab was out there in the papers yesterday saying that he knew of no Freo official who had seen the incident yet this trainer supposedly told Freo management, specifically Robert Shaw, directly after the game?

Freo staffer to give evidence on Baker-Farmer clash

Who's telling the truth Freo? And I notice that the article makes reference to Voss' "I saw it" comment but neglects to mention he DENIED seeing it both before and after that comment.

There's a stitch-up a-brewing....

{edited to add}
OK, I misread the article. I thought it was saying the meeting took place after the game. I still reckon there's something fishy in the fact he didn't come forward to Freo management right after the game.

The Peanut · Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:30am

cowboy18 wrote:My source says that it is this guy.

Spot on cowboy - 'The West' newspaper this morning states that he is a long-serving Fremantle trainer - funny that this 'part-time' staffer finally put up his hand at a special meeting held my the coaching staff requesting information.

Strange that he flew back to Perth with the whole crew and said nothing until the meeting - guess he must have been too upset to talk.

spert · Post: # 438140Post **spert** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:30am

This will be a ploy by Freo until they can find someone in their club who saw anything in Freo's favour. How's this for a headline: "Brisbane Lions former star sees an incident with Baker and Farmer but didn't see it"

stinger · Post: # 438144Post **stinger** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:38am

Riewoldting wrote:They don't put their name forward independently to the tribunal - they are a witness for Fremantle, so Fremantle calls them. I don't know at what stage parties have to notify the tribunal as to the names of witnesses, but I'd suggest that if the tribunal has been given a name, it is not in public domain because everyone is keeping their mouth shut about their identity, and correctly so.

with respect riewolting...that is pure crap.....freo...unless they have cited baker...are not a parties to the hearing........the saints copuld call farmer...but that is unlikely....the tribunal could call him themselves.......but in either case freo are not involved....

in the judd case brown was called....by westcoast....hawthorn were not a party to the proceedings.....

stinger · Post: # 438145Post **stinger** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 10:39am

rexy wrote:They are not a witness for fremantle, they are a witness for the AFL. The Fremantle footy club is not charging Baker the AFL is.

correct.....

bigred · Post: # 438162Post **bigred** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 11:01am

Fancy that...

A freo stich up.

Surprised?

stinger · Post: # 438165Post **stinger** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 11:10am

bigred wrote:Fancy that...

A freo stich up.

Surprised?

NO.

Leo.J · Post: # 438250Post **Leo.J** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 2:24pm

cowboy18 wrote:My source says that it is this guy.

No you're wrong my sources say its this guy...he apparently has a big mouth.

QueenC · Post: # 438275Post **QueenC** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:15pm

stinger wrote:
rexy wrote:They are not a witness for fremantle, they are a witness for the AFL. The Fremantle footy club is not charging Baker the AFL is.

correct.....

Witness for the AFL or not he still works for Fremantle. Right?

So how can anyone associated with an involved club give unbiased or untainted testimony in regards to an alleged incident involving one of their own?

Even if he tells the truth, which isn't a given, it will always be suspect and maybe even appeal-able if it gets that far.

Brian Collis · Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:34pm

If he is an unpaid trainer then he can't testify

Dan Warna · Post: # 438294Post **Dan Warna** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:41pm

Rules on the run brought to you by the AFL.

can anyone remember if Chick was fined for lying to an umpire?

do you think the AFL has the balls to fine buckley?

riccardo · Post: # 438299Post **riccardo** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:47pm

The "witness" is biased, his testimony should be invalid in any legal preceeding.

Why don't I call Dimwit and say I saw what happened? Bet you anything he'd tell me I'm a St kilda supporter who has a vested interest in the case so I can't testify.

Even when we beat the Frockers they still find a way to screw us to the wall.

SENsei · Post: # 438302Post **SENsei** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:52pm

stinger wrote:
Riewoldting wrote:They don't put their name forward independently to the tribunal - they are a witness for Fremantle, so Fremantle calls them. I don't know at what stage parties have to notify the tribunal as to the names of witnesses, but I'd suggest that if the tribunal has been given a name, it is not in public domain because everyone is keeping their mouth shut about their identity, and correctly so.

with respect riewolting...that is pure crap.....freo...unless they have cited baker...are not a parties to the hearing........the saints copuld call farmer...but that is unlikely....the tribunal could call him themselves.......but in either case freo are not involved....

in the judd case brown was called....by westcoast....hawthorn were not a party to the proceedings.....

Lock and Load - Denny Crane. You always make me think of Denny, stinger. DENNY CRANE!

yipper · Post: # 438303Post **yipper** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 3:52pm

If Bakes goes - then we need a new defence advocate / lawyer. This is a soda for any lawyer with just a smidgin of ability to get thrown out.

How any legal system can operate where an obvious bias exists with a witness, is beyond comprehension. And both Buckley and Voss SHOULD be fined for commenting on AFL Tribunal matters and prejudicing the proceedings.