Curtis Scott police assault charges dropped after court rules arrest 'unlawful'

[greeneyed]

The journalists have simply been reporting... indeed they have a duty to report... what Curtis Scott has been charged with by police, and to report the events as outlined in police statements. Now they’re reporting things that the defence lawyers are telling them. It’s what reporters properly do.

[Kryptonite]

Sounds like standard Australia Day celebrations.

Just needed to be a dog involved somehow

[DarkRaider]

No idea how this stuff works, is anything likely to be determined on March 20? If yes, surely no fault stand down is the safe option from the NRL given there’s only one real game between now and then anyway.

[Begbie]

No idea how this stuff works, is anything likely to be determined on March 20? If yes, surely no fault stand down is the safe option from the NRL given there’s only one real game between now and then anyway.

The legal parameters do not warrant a no fault stand down in this case. If they do step in and enforce something I only hope they are consistent.

[greeneyed]

AUDIO: Should the NRL suspend Curtis Scott following the Australia Day incident? Mark Geyer thinks he'll be playing in Round 1: https://omny.fm/shows/the-rush-hour-wit ... owing-aust

[Neeeegz]

Carney MkII indeed.

Imagine my surprise with you saying this.
Omg
OMG

[Neeeegz]

Would the club of seen the footage ? Or only the legal team ?

[Botman]

According to Dylan's Raider who is a lawyer, his solicitor has full access and probably copies of all evidence... i dont know the legalities of it in terms of who the solicitor can show that to, but by hook or crook, id be stunned of the likes of DFJ and Stick etc havent seen it and know what they're dealing with

[cat]

The journalists have simply been reporting... indeed they have a duty to report... what Curtis Scott has been charged with by police, and to report the events as outlined in police statements. Now they’re reporting things that the defence lawyers are telling them. It’s what reporters properly do.

Thats garbage, journos these days, and in particular ones involved with celebrities or sport all have agendas and right accordingly

Most have clubs , coaches, players etc who help persuade them to report in certain ways, and that keeps the leaks and exclusives coming

[greeneyed]

The journalists have simply been reporting... indeed they have a duty to report... what Curtis Scott has been charged with by police, and to report the events as outlined in police statements. Now they’re reporting things that the defence lawyers are telling them. It’s what reporters properly do.

Thats garbage, journos these days, and in particular ones involved with celebrities or sport all have agendas and right accordingly

Most have clubs , coaches, players etc who help persuade them to report in certain ways, and that keeps the leaks and exclusives coming

What I’ve stated is certainly not garbage. I’m not arguing that some journalists do not have good access to certain clubs - and report what they are saying. I think we all know which ones have close links to the Raiders. However, the vast bulk of reporting in this case is been pretty much straight up and down the line. A lot of it is from crime reporters, simply reporting the charges and the police statements. The journalists are now reporting information now given to them by defence lawyers. The vast bulk are just doing their job, in a professional way. If you can point me to a journalist who is deliberately slanting this story against Curtis Scott - which I take to be the implication (possibly incorrectly) - I’d be interested to read the stories.

[Botman]

agreed GE.

Reporters reporting on the facts of one of our players is not some vandetta against us. That's their job. This a wild, WILD swing from Cat.
I've actually found the coverage of this to be quite interesting in that no one has really gone in THAT hard on him as yet.

[cat]

Every single article that has been written GE has been slanted either in favour of ( very few) or against Curtis

The only true information that has been reported unbiasedly has been the list of charges he was charged with

The use of the terms " punched, kicked, aggressive" etc are all terms not used by the police

They are suggestive and emotive words used to influence the reader.


They could have said " an officer was struck during the incident" which is what happened

The terms most of those articles used made it sound like curtis was completely out of control going kung fu panda style and implied that he was deliberately and violently injuring a police officer.

Therefore influencing the reader to achieve the reporters preset agenda, be it anti nrl or what ever.

And certain journos dont just have close links to certain clubs they are controlled by certain clubs/people

[cat]

agreed GE.

Reporters reporting on the facts of one of our players is not some vandetta against us. That's their job. This a wild, WILD swing from Cat.
I've actually found the coverage of this to be quite interesting in that no one has really gone in THAT hard on him as yet.

Really dont care what you think of my opinion ,

All journos have an angle/agenda

And i never said it was against the raiders, most likely its against the players in general, slow off season, need drama etc

And i think the only reason it hasnt been bigger is because they cant get to curtis for a quote, no none cop witnesss and no leaked footage so not much more they can say

[casta66]

agreed GE.

Reporters reporting on the facts of one of our players is not some vandetta against us. That's their job. This a wild, WILD swing from Cat.
I've actually found the coverage of this to be quite interesting in that no one has really gone in THAT hard on him as yet.

Really dont care what you think of my opinion ,

All journos have an angle/agenda

And i never said it was against the raiders, most likely its against the players in general, slow off season, need drama etc

And i think the only reason it hasnt been bigger is because they cant get to curtis for a quote, no none cop witnesss and no leaked footage so not much more they can say

Not sure how any of us here can criticise the journalists for speculating. Go back through this thread and you'll find weve been speculating more extravagantly. And much more has been written here than all the papers combined.

Fact is, it is a decent story. Which is why we are still writing about it.

What would you have the journalists do? If you don't like the creative writing, simply go to lawlink and read the court listings rather than the media.

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk

[Botman]

Jesus wept.
Have a bex and lie down.

They arent all out to get us and your angle/agenda is more on show here than the media's. Sort it out, Cat.

[-TW-]

agreed GE.

Reporters reporting on the facts of one of our players is not some vandetta against us. That's their job. This a wild, WILD swing from Cat.
I've actually found the coverage of this to be quite interesting in that no one has really gone in THAT hard on him as yet.

Really dont care what you think of my opinion ,

All journos have an angle/agenda

And i never said it was against the raiders, most likely its against the players in general, slow off season, need drama etc

And i think the only reason it hasnt been bigger is because they cant get to curtis for a quote, no none cop witnesss and no leaked footage so not much more they can say

Enjoy being sued.. that's just slander

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

[Johno]

Jesus wept.
Have a bex and lie down.

They arent all out to get us and your angle/agenda is more on show here than the media's. Sort it out, Cat.

A bex!!!

Do they still sell them?

[greeneyed]

Every single article that has been written GE has been slanted either in favour of ( very few) or against Curtis

The only true information that has been reported unbiasedly has been the list of charges he was charged with

The use of the terms " punched, kicked, aggressive" etc are all terms not used by the police

They are suggestive and emotive words used to influence the reader.


They could have said " an officer was struck during the incident" which is what happened

The terms most of those articles used made it sound like curtis was completely out of control going kung fu panda style and implied that he was deliberately and violently injuring a police officer.

Therefore influencing the reader to achieve the reporters preset agenda, be it anti nrl or what ever.

And certain journos dont just have close links to certain clubs they are controlled by certain clubs/people

They’re pretty much precisely the words used in police statements. Here’s the first report they issued:

A man will appear before court next month after he allegedly assaulted police and resisted arrest overnight.

About 12.45am (Monday 27 January 2020), police were called to Driver Avenue, Moore Park, following reports a man was acting erratically.

Officers attached to Surry Hills Police Area Command located the man and attempted to assist him.

The 22-year-old man allegedly became aggressive and kicked and punched one of the officers.

The man was tasered and arrested.

He was taken to Surry Hills Police Station where he was charged with:

Assault officer in execution of duty (x2)
Resist officer in execution of duty
Behave in offensive manner in/near public place/school
Behave in an offensive or indecent manner
Remain on, enter trust lands after request to leave.

He was granted bail to appear at Downing Centre Local Court on Thursday 20 February 2020.

https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/news/news ... w9MQ%3D%3D

The journalists have been very simply reporting what has been said... and factually... if you can point me to something truly slanted by a journalist... happy to read the link.

[cat]

Couldn't be bothered mate, you have your opinion, I have mine

All I will say is I respect you have your opinion and others have theirs.

I also respect and know many on here know more then me about somethings, other things, like how things work in Sydney rather then Canberra I know more then some

[greeneyed]

agreed GE.

Reporters reporting on the facts of one of our players is not some vandetta against us. That's their job. This a wild, WILD swing from Cat.
I've actually found the coverage of this to be quite interesting in that no one has really gone in THAT hard on him as yet.

Really dont care what you think of my opinion ,

All journos have an angle/agenda

And i never said it was against the raiders, most likely its against the players in general, slow off season, need drama etc

And i think the only reason it hasnt been bigger is because they cant get to curtis for a quote, no none cop witnesss and no leaked footage so not much more they can say

Not sure how any of us here can criticise the journalists for speculating. Go back through this thread and you'll find weve been speculating more extravagantly. And much more has been written here than all the papers combined.

If you read Facebook or Twitter, the Raiders fans have also been far more extravagant on one side of the other... calls for sacking to strenuous defence. All before all the facts are available. Views on this site have been reasonably balanced in comparison.

[gerg]

I'm sure GE will correct my terrible memory but isn't this a little similar to how the Wighton situation progressed.

The club kinda played a straight bat and said the NRL is responsible for the punishment and then the media went into circus mode - and I do confess to getting quite caught up in it. I had the impression Wighton had charged around civic re-enacting a scene from Romper Stomper.

While that was happening the NRL was sitting on it's hands trying to push responsibility back on the club - the media frenzy ultimately pushed the club into a suggestion of 4-6 weeks. Straight away there were leaks coming out of NRL HQ of up to a season - ie up to 20 weeks. This forced the clubs hand to go for somewhere in the middle.

Given there are 3 separate but still similar incidents up for review, no matter what sanctions are dished out, know that "consistency is overrated in the NRL" Todd Greenberg February 2019.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[Green Hornet]

Can we just brush this under the carpet and move on?

[dubby]

I find it extremely difficult to believe the police would handcuff an unconscious person.

First thing they'd do is check his breathing and pulse. In this case I'd wager Scott was displayed strong indicia of alcohol consumption, so they'd likely assume he's passed out drunk.

Depending on his state, They'd then try and put him in their car, or call an ambulance.

My guess is he was extremely drunk, lied down/passed out.
Police woke him up, he became agitated and lashed out.

Police used appropriate use of force to subdue Scott, apply cuffs and take him away.

What I'd be rather keen to know is if they conducted a BAS at the station. If he was high range, they'd argue that his state of mind and memory was impaired and thus unreliable.

This new footage his defense mentioned makes it interesting.

It's that vs police body cameras. How could the two be so polar?

Either way, C Scott just strikes me as a stupid drunk fool. He should have never been in that state to begin with.



Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[dubby]

And the very notion that male police see this as a kind of physical challenge is ludicrous. That's a very broad and loose ideology based on nothing.

Cops don't usually like to go hand to hand with crooks. They don't like getting hurt, and facing an enquiry as a result of avoiding best practice and ignoring their use of force model.

To think that a 48 year old senior conny or Sgt will see Scott as a chance to exert his mighty fine fighting prowess is just plain wrong.

Even if it's a fit 26 year old. Cops are well aware of the dangers surrounding their job, and really try to just get home safely.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

Dubby... there are two reported videos. One is a SCG CCTV video and the other source is the police body cameras. Both the police and the defendant’s lawyers seem to be saying the police body camera video backs their version of events.

[Dopium]

Not going to post unsubstantiated hearsay, but from what I’ve heard this guy is EDIT. Credible source too. Not sure I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here.

We’ve worked so hard to repair and grow our culture. I don’t feel good about him at all - we have enough talent in our backline to be more picky about the kind of people we want on our team

[Dylan’s Raiders]

In respect of the Mention scheduled for 20 March, nothing substantial will happen at this. They should get a date set for the trial and that’s it. Given there is only a handful of witnesses, I imagine that it would only take a day. I’m unsure how backed up the NSW courts are but I imagine he may get a date sometime in July for the trial.

Tough decision for Greenburg coming up - my (potentially unpopular) opinion is that I don’t believe he should be suspended prior to the trial.

Also, I don’t understand how old mate Fifita can punch a bloke in the jaw and miss zero games... not saying it’s as bad as assaulting a police officer but this needs to be taken into the consideration by the NRL should they be intending on banning Scott.

[Seiffert82]

Not going to post unsubstantiated hearsay, but from what I’ve heard this guy is EDIT. Credible source too. Not sure I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here.

We’ve worked so hard to repair and grow our culture. I don’t feel good about him at all - we have enough talent in our backline to be more picky about the kind of people we want on our team

I'm not sure what he's like in person, but there's a growing body of evidence to suggest he's got a few personality issues. That's the big problem here. Nobody is bigger than the team, certainly not this bloke.

He's bad news. Whether he survives this or not, the long history of cases like this indicates he's highly unlikely to see out his 4 year contract before getting dumped. 22 years old and major issues at two clubs already.

I don't really care who's legally right or wrong in this case. If he has lost the respect of his teammates and, more importantly, the coaching staff, they need to cut him loose sooner rather than later. It's not worth it.

I'm sure many people here are only defending him because they are worried about what the club will do without him. If he was a Neville Nobody, noone would give a **** if he was sacked.

[greeneyed]

It is pretty clear the NRL should not stand him down. It is obvious now that the facts of the case are seriously disputed and the charges don't meet the terms of an automatic stand down. The legal process is required to determine what occurred.

[Dusty]

Based on what has been presented in the media and the reports from the court hearing to date... I can't see how the NRL can stand him down before the issue is settled in court.

I think he should be allowed to train and play. The Raiders should make the call on round 1 based on his mental status at the time. If he's distracted, 'Stand him down', if not , poick the best team until told otherwise by a court ruling.

[-PJ-]

Cuffed while unconscious...WOW.

Crap just got interesting, time for popcorn.

I said this a few pages back and will say it again.

Cops do not cuff an unconscious man laying in the park. There's protocol they must follow.

Serve and protect..NOT..cuff and taser.

[BJ]

I’m basing my knowledge of policing on Detective Frank Drebin.

“When I see a person in the park stabbing someone, I shoot first and ask questions later.”

Response: that was Shakespeare in the parks version of Julius Caesar.

[BJ]

https://youtu.be/pNdtLURhj3Q

[greeneyed]

Canberra Raiders recruit Curtis Scott alleges he was Tasered while handcuffed, sitting under a tree

Canberra Raiders player Curtis Scott's legal team will accuse police of Tasering the 22-year-old while he was handcuffed and sitting beneath a tree during his Australia Day weekend mishap.

Scott's lawyer Danny Eid said police allegedly "breached their own procedures" when they Tasered the NRL star and accused the officers of "illegal conduct" as his client did not pose a threat.

Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/curtis ... 53wha.html

[Seiffert82]

Yes, this would surely become the first known case of a person punching a police officer after he was cuffed while unconscious.

Very different accounts of events.