Titans and Hunt on drugs charges

[C-Whiz]

Just wondering if someone can define "Supply" ???? Is it where the individual knows the dealer and puts someone in contact with the dealer??? That's just my guess????

According to a lawyer (I believe he was a partner at a Brisbane firm) on Nova FM this morning "supply" can be used as an exciting way of saying "possession" because under the law you are supplying the drug to yourself. What he said was it was a deliberate way to drum up media attention and little more in this context.
The latest is its based on telephone intercepts, so it's sounding Moreland more like media beat up BS to me.
No doubt there is some fire with all this smoke, but I think the idea that there was some drug syndicate running from the Titans locker room is starting to dissolve.

[DavidBouveng]

According to a lawyer (I believe he was a partner at a Brisbane firm) on Nova FM this morning "supply" can be used as an exciting way of saying "possession" because under the law you are supplying the drug to yourself. What he said was it was a deliberate way to drum up media attention and little more in this context.
The latest is its based on telephone intercepts, so it's sounding Moreland more like media beat up BS to me.
No doubt there is some fire with all this smoke, but I think the idea that there was some drug syndicate running from the Titans locker room is starting to dissolve.

I always thought the titans players were at the bottom end of the chain. Like, grabbing a bit for you and three buddies. Don't think anyone could confuse coal train as a mastermind drug supplier.
If he is, it's the most elaborate and committed effort at appearing dopey I've ever seen.

[C-Whiz]

Haha, good point. Funny no one has mentioned the groundsman yet.
He's been laying big white lines right under everyone's noses...

[TITAN PETE]

Haha, good point. Funny no one has mentioned the groundsman yet.
He's been laying big white lines right under everyone's noses...

maybe it was Joe the camera man

[karnage]

Yes, interesting to read that the defense lawyer states they have no case to answer. Still, regrdless of what side you take here it is formed by what you read or hear.

Richard Ings has stated that if found guilty of use in a court of law they can expect 4 years suspension under the WADA code. That's a life sentence.

Even if Greg Bird gets off, I honestly hope he never plays for our team again. I simply don't like him.

[Mexican titan]

According to a lawyer (I believe he was a partner at a Brisbane firm) on Nova FM this morning "supply" can be used as an exciting way of saying "possession" because under the law you are supplying the drug to yourself. What he said was it was a deliberate way to drum up media attention and little more in this context.
The latest is its based on telephone intercepts, so it's sounding Moreland more like media beat up BS to me.
No doubt there is some fire with all this smoke, but I think the idea that there was some drug syndicate running from the Titans locker room is starting to dissolve.

I was also often amused by the ASADA definition of "trafficking". In Sandor Earl's case he picked up his peptides for his supposed shoulder injury from Dank and then drove them to his Doctor to administer them. Because he moved the banned substance from point A to point B he met their definition of trafficker. Crazy.

- - - Updated - - -

Even if Greg Bird gets off, I honestly hope he never plays for our team again. I simply don't like him.

Unless he is completely innocent of this I agree with you. Any guilt in this whatsoever and I reckon he has had enough strikes against him and the club has enough to send him on his way.

[Max]

Just wondering if someone can define "Supply" ???? Is it where the individual knows the dealer and puts someone in contact with the dealer??? That's just my guess????

*8-29 Definitions
Supply
Under s 4, ‘supply’ means:
‘(i) give, distribute, sell, administer, transport or supply; or
(ii) offering to do any act specified in subparagraph (i); or
(iii) doing or offering to do any act preparatory to, in furtherance of, or for the purpose of, any act specified in
subparagraph (1)’.
This definition is wide-ranging and examined further in 8-30 below.

8-30 Supply
While s 4 of the Act does define the word ‘supply’ (see definition above), that definition contains the word ‘supply’,
which is not itself further defined. In Commonwealth v Sterling Nicholas Duty Free (1972) 126 CLR 297, 309, it was
stated that ‘the supply of goods does not necessitate a change in ownership of the goods supplied. In many cases
the word “supply” is equivalent to “provide”. A supplier...may be one who delivers’.
The word ‘supply’ was defined in Andaloro v Wyong Cooperative Dairy Society Limited (1965) 66 SR (NSW) 466, 479
as ‘the furnishing or providing of [a] commodity by one person who has it to or for another person who requires it’.
Therefore, a medical practitioner who systematically wrote prescriptions for drugs of addiction knowing that people
would present them to chemists to procure those drugs was held to have ‘supplied’ within the definition in the
Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW) (R v Coles [1984] 1 NSWLR 726).
A person who offers to supply drugs with no intention of fulfilling the offer still ‘supplies’ within the definition in s 4,
though it would not constitute an offence if it could be shown that the offer was not a ‘genuine offer’ (R v Roberts
(Unreported, Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal, CA 353 of 1987, Kelly SPJ, Macrossan and Derrington JJ, 23
February 1988)).


(*Legal Aid Queensland – Criminal Law Duty Lawyer Handbook Chapter 8—Drug offences | 86*)[/I]

[ozynorts]

Unfortunately I think the club has to wait until the courts are done with them before they can act. This poses a problem because we will have a lot of money sitting on the side lines.
The club might have the decision taken out of their hands though if they are convicted of anything as ASADA might then get involved.
Until then we are in limbo.

- - - Updated - - -

*8-29 Definitions
Supply
Under s 4, ‘supply’ means:
‘(i) give, distribute, sell, administer, transport or supply; or
(ii) offering to do any act specified in subparagraph (i); or
(iii) doing or offering to do any act preparatory to, in furtherance of, or for the purpose of, any act specified in
subparagraph (1)’.
This definition is wide-ranging and examined further in 8-30 below.

8-30 Supply
While s 4 of the Act does define the word ‘supply’ (see definition above), that definition contains the word ‘supply’,
which is not itself further defined. In Commonwealth v Sterling Nicholas Duty Free (1972) 126 CLR 297, 309, it was
stated that ‘the supply of goods does not necessitate a change in ownership of the goods supplied. In many cases
the word “supply” is equivalent to “provide”. A supplier...may be one who delivers’.
The word ‘supply’ was defined in Andaloro v Wyong Cooperative Dairy Society Limited (1965) 66 SR (NSW) 466, 479
as ‘the furnishing or providing of [a] commodity by one person who has it to or for another person who requires it’.
Therefore, a medical practitioner who systematically wrote prescriptions for drugs of addiction knowing that people
would present them to chemists to procure those drugs was held to have ‘supplied’ within the definition in the
Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW) (R v Coles [1984] 1 NSWLR 726).
A person who offers to supply drugs with no intention of fulfilling the offer still ‘supplies’ within the definition in s 4,
though it would not constitute an offence if it could be shown that the offer was not a ‘genuine offer’ (R v Roberts
(Unreported, Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal, CA 353 of 1987, Kelly SPJ, Macrossan and Derrington JJ, 23
February 1988)).


(*Legal Aid Queensland – Criminal Law Duty Lawyer Handbook Chapter 8—Drug offences | 86*)[/I]

So if the police have a recording of them saying they want to score for themselves and some mates...........

[Max]

Unfortunately I think the club has to wait until the courts are done with them before they can act. This poses a problem because we will have a lot of money sitting on the side lines.
The club might have the decision taken out of their hands though if they are convicted of anything as ASADA might then get involved.
Until then we are in limbo.

- - - Updated - - -



So if the police have a recording of them saying they want to score for themselves and some mates...........

In reality the police brief would require further physical evidence that an offence had been committed. Example; [surveillance video/photographs or police/person witnessing the exchange].

If the police brief is only reliant on the trace intercepts the lawyers defending could possibly go down the lines of;

***A person who offers to supply drugs with no intention of fulfilling the offer still ‘supplies’ within the definition in s 4,
though it would not constitute an offence if it could be shown that the offer was not a ‘genuine offer’ (R v Roberts
(Unreported, Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal, CA 353 of 1987, Kelly SPJ, Macrossan and Derrington JJ, 23
February 1988)

(***Legal Aid Queensland – Criminal Law Duty Lawyer Handbook Chapter 8—Drug offences | 86*

[Bayside Titan]

Now reading the Suns and Qld Cricket are being looked at or a former cricketer.

[Titan4Life]

The dark cloud has passed over the Titans it seems. There is possibly a guy though being looked at and he is a Channel 9 commentator. Now I don't want to give it away but his first name rhymes with Karen and his last name is also the same name as a valley Him being announced would certainly take some of the heat off of us.

[karnage]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blo...rompt-collapse

[Titan4Life]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blo...rompt-collapse

That article seriously made my head hurt. So badly written and so many errors. Even a preschooler could produce a better article.

[DIEHARD]

Regarding that article above. And the war analogy. We can't retreat. If we did the Gold Coast would be lost. No National Rugby League team would re-enter.

[Titan4Life]

The worst thing the NRL could do is let the Titans fold or relocate. The NRL needs a team on the Gold Coast. No doubt the game needs a team in Ipswich and Perth but moving the Titans there is not the right option. As a code we can't let the AFL continue to win the battle on the GC. I'm sure the NRL doesn't want this to happen so I can't see us folding. Well not yet anyway.