Criminal courts have a higher standard burden of proof. Not guilty doesn't mean he didn't bring the club into disrepute given his previous Australia day and Bateman incidents.
Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Moderator: GH Moderators
-
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4691
- Joined: August 28, 2016, 6:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
He lied to his employer about the events didn't he? On a disciplinary matter he'd breached in previously.Hong Kong Raider wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 3:22 amCriminal courts have a higher standard burden of proof. Not guilty doesn't mean he didn't bring the club into disrepute given his previous Australia day and Bateman incidents.
Still sackable as a 3rd strike?
He'd had Oz day stuff up (throwing phones at passing cars and then the police brutality).
Punching windows out at training and breaking/cutting his hand.
Punching randoms at Cocomo and trying to cover it up.
3 strikes. That we know about.
- Seiffert82
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 27846
- Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Bay56
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Exactly.BadnMean wrote:He lied to his employer about the events didn't he? On a disciplinary matter he'd breached in previously.Hong Kong Raider wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 3:22 amCriminal courts have a higher standard burden of proof. Not guilty doesn't mean he didn't bring the club into disrepute given his previous Australia day and Bateman incidents.
Still sackable as a 3rd strike?
He'd had Oz day stuff up (throwing phones at passing cars and then the police brutality).
Punching windows out at training and breaking/cutting his hand.
Punching randoms at Cocomo and trying to cover it up.
3 strikes. That we know about.
Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
I really can't believe that more isn't being made of this? This is really bad.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12444
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
This looks really really bad for our legal system
- there is no evidence that the guy said " he wants a gay experience ", its all here say. It doesn't pass the pub test- does anyone actually say " gay experience "???
- yes he was wrongly tazered by the cops, but is that a golden ticket for ever?
- the guy puts photos of his tats up on instagram and LOVES showing them off but doesn't want to show them off in a night club?
I hope for Curtis's sake he is found guilty of the DV charges he is facing in Sydney otherwise he is going to think he is untouchable and that will end in tears
- there is no evidence that the guy said " he wants a gay experience ", its all here say. It doesn't pass the pub test- does anyone actually say " gay experience "???
- yes he was wrongly tazered by the cops, but is that a golden ticket for ever?
- the guy puts photos of his tats up on instagram and LOVES showing them off but doesn't want to show them off in a night club?
I hope for Curtis's sake he is found guilty of the DV charges he is facing in Sydney otherwise he is going to think he is untouchable and that will end in tears
Vaccinated
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Ever since Curtis dumped Dennis Denuto as his lawyer and got My Cousin Vinny, he’s become untouchable in the eyes of the law.
I fully expect his lawyer to have Curtis welcomed back to the NRL, playing for the Kangaroos and a board seat on the NRL commission by mid June.
The NRL judiciary would have found themselves in contempt and suspending the tackled player if Jack Wighton had used him in defence of his lifting tackle.
I fully expect his lawyer to have Curtis welcomed back to the NRL, playing for the Kangaroos and a board seat on the NRL commission by mid June.
The NRL judiciary would have found themselves in contempt and suspending the tackled player if Jack Wighton had used him in defence of his lifting tackle.
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Jack Wighton would have got off on assaulting 5 blokes and being suspended for 10 games or whatever it was if he'd just used Scott's lawyer. "I was acting in self defence, all five blokes said they wanted to have a "gay experience" with me! I feared for my life!" Not guilty.BJ wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 11:46 am Ever since Curtis dumped Dennis Denuto as his lawyer and got My Cousin Vinny, he’s become untouchable in the eyes of the law.
I fully expect his lawyer to have Curtis welcomed back to the NRL, playing for the Kangaroos and a board seat on the NRL commission by mid June.
The NRL judiciary would have found themselves in contempt and suspending the tackled player if Jack Wighton had used him in defence of his lifting tackle.
Ata Mariota’s #1 fan. Bless his cotton socks.
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Spot on Finchy.
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
I tried to rationalise it as them claiming it to have been part of an assault (ie making physical contact with Scott) but honestly, yes...they really did roll out the gay panic defence in 2022. The mind boggles.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- yurithe1
- David Furner
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: March 16, 2008, 10:27 am
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Canberra
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Some people talk about the weather. Others do something about it.
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
I don't have the faintest clue about the law but how do you plead self defence if you threw the first punch? Surely suggesting that you thought you were going to be assaulted isn't justicification for assaulting someone? It's the **** chewbacca defence.yurithe1 wrote:He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
I've been cracked onto many times in the club by men and women, I find it flattering, I've never wanted crack some one for finding me attractive.
Sent from my SM-A115F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A115F using Tapatalk
This place is woke.
- Mickey_Raider
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4342
- Joined: March 16, 2008, 7:15 am
- Favourite Player: Big Papa
- Location: North Sydney
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
That is actually the essence of what assault is. It doesn't necessarily require being physically punched in the face; it is enough being under the apprehension that you're about to be punched in the face or there is a risk of same.gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 1:51 pmI don't have the faintest clue about the law but how do you plead self defence if you threw the first punch? Surely suggesting that you thought you were going to be assaulted isn't justicification for assaulting someone? It's the **** chewbacca defence.yurithe1 wrote:He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Up The Milk
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Nothing but respect for the defence
That’s one hell of a move and they got the result
An ignominious end to his time in Canberra
That’s one hell of a move and they got the result
An ignominious end to his time in Canberra
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Also I don’t think this helps Scott at all in this wrongful dismissal claim against the club, they took their time and came to the decision they felt comfortable with and that was long before a guilty verdict was on the cards
That ship sailed long ago
That ship sailed long ago
- Seiffert82
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 27846
- Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Bay56
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
He didn't even tell the club of the assault when it happened. That in and of itself was probably enough.Botman wrote:Also I don’t think this helps Scott at all in this wrongful dismissal claim against the club, they took their time and came to the decision they felt comfortable with and that was long before a guilty verdict was on the cards
That ship sailed long ago
Let alone the crap from the previous preseason...and the domestic violence charges.
Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Wouldn't that be intimidation? Surely you can't just clock someone and say you thought they were going to punch you, so you punched them first?Mickey_Raider wrote:That is actually the essence of what assault is. It doesn't necessarily require being physically punched in the face; it is enough being under the apprehension that you're about to be punched in the face or there is a risk of same.gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 1:51 pmI don't have the faintest clue about the law but how do you plead self defence if you threw the first punch? Surely suggesting that you thought you were going to be assaulted isn't justicification for assaulting someone? It's the **** chewbacca defence.yurithe1 wrote:He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Evidence accepted by both sides and on camera has the other side grabbing Scott- the "restraining" and shirt lifting referred to. Evidently the court decided that was also an unwanted assault (not battery or other varieties but unwanted touching or physicality).gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 6:17 pmWouldn't that be intimidation? Surely you can't just clock someone and say you thought they were going to punch you, so you punched them first?Mickey_Raider wrote:That is actually the essence of what assault is. It doesn't necessarily require being physically punched in the face; it is enough being under the apprehension that you're about to be punched in the face or there is a risk of same.gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 1:51 pmI don't have the faintest clue about the law but how do you plead self defence if you threw the first punch? Surely suggesting that you thought you were going to be assaulted isn't justicification for assaulting someone? It's the **** chewbacca defence.yurithe1 wrote:He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12408
- Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
- Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Some really weird takes here. There has been two separate legal processes relating to two separate incidents and two outcomes determined by the courts. It feels like there is a sense that where the outcomes don’t align with the narrative that best suits the raiders fans the results are being questioned like it’s an extension of the unconscious bias we supposedly battle on a daily basis. Very odd that some people can so definitely pass judgment on a decision by the court based off a couple of paragraphs in a newspaper article.
-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 51015
- Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
- Favourite Player: Hodgo
- Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
What's even more amazing is that if he still played for the Raiders, certain posters would have the completely opposite viewpoint!Billy Walker wrote: ↑May 18, 2022, 7:20 am Some really weird takes here. There has been two separate legal processes relating to two separate incidents and two outcomes determined by the courts. It feels like there is a sense that where the outcomes don’t align with the narrative that best suits the raiders fans the results are being questioned like it’s an extension of the unconscious bias we supposedly battle on a daily basis. Very odd that some people can so definitely pass judgment on a decision by the court based off a couple of paragraphs in a newspaper article.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12408
- Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
- Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Like how they are outraged by the unfair mistreatment, bullying and unconscious bias that poor Tommy Starling cops each and every year when he endeavours to just have a quiet beer at his local right.The Nickman wrote: ↑May 18, 2022, 9:21 amWhat's even more amazing is that if he still played for the Raiders, certain posters would have the completely opposite viewpoint!Billy Walker wrote: ↑May 18, 2022, 7:20 am Some really weird takes here. There has been two separate legal processes relating to two separate incidents and two outcomes determined by the courts. It feels like there is a sense that where the outcomes don’t align with the narrative that best suits the raiders fans the results are being questioned like it’s an extension of the unconscious bias we supposedly battle on a daily basis. Very odd that some people can so definitely pass judgment on a decision by the court based off a couple of paragraphs in a newspaper article.
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Ok, I guess so. I find it hard to really make out anything from the footage. Just arms flying about the place from all parties.BadnMean wrote:Evidence accepted by both sides and on camera has the other side grabbing Scott- the "restraining" and shirt lifting referred to. Evidently the court decided that was also an unwanted assault (not battery or other varieties but unwanted touching or physicality).gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 6:17 pmWouldn't that be intimidation? Surely you can't just clock someone and say you thought they were going to punch you, so you punched them first?Mickey_Raider wrote:That is actually the essence of what assault is. It doesn't necessarily require being physically punched in the face; it is enough being under the apprehension that you're about to be punched in the face or there is a risk of same.gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 1:51 pmI don't have the faintest clue about the law but how do you plead self defence if you threw the first punch? Surely suggesting that you thought you were going to be assaulted isn't justicification for assaulting someone? It's the **** chewbacca defence.yurithe1 wrote:He pleaded self defence. The "gay experience" thing is only part of the background to the incident. The bloke pulled his shirt down to look at Scott's tattoos. Then, he told him he'd like to "**** him". Then, the gay experience comment came up.
Security guard Craig O'Connor, the only witness who was sober at the time in question, indicated he had heard the man telling Scott about a desire to have "a gay moment" with him.
The alleged victim got pulled away by a friend of his who told him the victim was drunk. The friend then returned and grabbed Scott's wrists and restrained him for some reason. Scott broke away, but the original bloke came at him and Scott was now of the belief that this bloke was drunk and potentially violent. He also had the friend who had grabbed him to contend with.
Scott felt out-numbered and in danger. "A backs against the wall" situation he claimed. "Gay panic" had nothing to do with it. He thought he was going to be bashed by two men. So, he punched the first bloke in the nose. What would a reasonable person do? Wait to see how it played out and maybe get hospitalised?
In closing submissions, Mr Macedone urged the court to find Scott had thrown the punch on the basis he had feared an imminent attack.
Case closed. Now he has the three DV charges against him to contests later this year.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
- yurithe1
- David Furner
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: March 16, 2008, 10:27 am
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Canberra
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Just to clarify, "assault" is the threat of violence. "Battery" is the actual violence being carried out. That's why the two terms are usually connected to each other.gergreg wrote: ↑May 18, 2022, 5:13 pmOk, I guess so. I find it hard to really make out anything from the footage. Just arms flying about the place from all parties.BadnMean wrote:Evidence accepted by both sides and on camera has the other side grabbing Scott- the "restraining" and shirt lifting referred to. Evidently the court decided that was also an unwanted assault (not battery or other varieties but unwanted touching or physicality).gergreg wrote: ↑May 17, 2022, 6:17 pmWouldn't that be intimidation? Surely you can't just clock someone and say you thought they were going to punch you, so you punched them first?Mickey_Raider wrote:That is actually the essence of what assault is. It doesn't necessarily require being physically punched in the face; it is enough being under the apprehension that you're about to be punched in the face or there is a risk of same.
Some people talk about the weather. Others do something about it.
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Curtis Scott set to sue Canberra Raiders for sacking over nightclub incident
Curtis Scott is set to commence legal action against the Raiders after the sacked centre was found cleared of an assault charge on Monday. Scott was found not guilty on the grounds of self defence for hitting a man at a Canberra nightclub last year.
“I am instructed to explore and look into any action against the Raiders for unlawful termination,” lawyer Sam Macedone said. “Now that this has been dealt with we will look at that possibility.”
Read more: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport ... b138f2c4c0
Curtis Scott considers suing Canberra Raiders for unfair dismissal following acquittal on assault charge
Curtis Scott is considering legal action against the Canberra Raiders for unfair dismissal in the wake of beating the assault charge that led to the NRL club tearing up his contract. Scott was cleared of assault in the ACT Magistrates Court on Monday on the grounds of self-defence. Scott said he'd been threatened by the man, who touched him and said he wanted to have a "gay experience" with him.
Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14280
Former Raiders player Curtis Scott cleared of assault charge over punch at Canberra nightclub: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-16/ ... /101071646
Curtis Scott is set to commence legal action against the Raiders after the sacked centre was found cleared of an assault charge on Monday. Scott was found not guilty on the grounds of self defence for hitting a man at a Canberra nightclub last year.
“I am instructed to explore and look into any action against the Raiders for unlawful termination,” lawyer Sam Macedone said. “Now that this has been dealt with we will look at that possibility.”
Read more: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport ... b138f2c4c0
Curtis Scott considers suing Canberra Raiders for unfair dismissal following acquittal on assault charge
Curtis Scott is considering legal action against the Canberra Raiders for unfair dismissal in the wake of beating the assault charge that led to the NRL club tearing up his contract. Scott was cleared of assault in the ACT Magistrates Court on Monday on the grounds of self-defence. Scott said he'd been threatened by the man, who touched him and said he wanted to have a "gay experience" with him.
Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14280
Former Raiders player Curtis Scott cleared of assault charge over punch at Canberra nightclub: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-16/ ... /101071646
- Seiffert82
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 27846
- Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Bay56
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Haha.
Curtis Scott. What an absolute stain on this club.
Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk
Curtis Scott. What an absolute stain on this club.
Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12444
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Firstly this lawyer doesn't need any more clients, curtis is keeping him busy enough!
But I am very confident he has no case for suing the raiders.
One thing I will say about Donny he has been awesome at terminating contracts legally. Last one I remember even trying was Steve Irwin and he didn't win
But I am very confident he has no case for suing the raiders.
One thing I will say about Donny he has been awesome at terminating contracts legally. Last one I remember even trying was Steve Irwin and he didn't win
Vaccinated
- Raider47
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4751
- Joined: April 15, 2009, 10:38 am
- Favourite Player: Matt Timoko
- Location: Queanbo
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Can we sue him for frauding Canberra in thinking he was a professional rugby league player?
- -PJ-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 24720
- Joined: May 8, 2010, 1:58 pm
- Favourite Player: Josh Papalii
- Location: 416.9 km from GIO Stadium
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Yes, a counter sue.
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank
#emptythetank
- FuiFui BradBrad
- Bradley Clyde
- Posts: 8651
- Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
- Favourite Player: Phil Graham
- Location: Marsden Park
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
So he’s going to become a career suer. You do you I guess
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.
Nickman's love of NSW
Nickman's love of NSW
- NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
- NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Im sure he has been instructed to look at it and im sure that's what he'll do, even if he doesnt have much of a case, they might get some "go away" settlement money... cant hurt to try.
Given the time it took for the Raiders to action this, i would HOPE they've got their ducks in a row on this.
Given the time it took for the Raiders to action this, i would HOPE they've got their ducks in a row on this.
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Wasn't it only last year that the club 'settled' with G. Williams after a less than ideal departure from the club?cat wrote:Firstly this lawyer doesn't need any more clients, curtis is keeping him busy enough!
But I am very confident he has no case for suing the raiders.
One thing I will say about Donny he has been awesome at terminating contracts legally. Last one I remember even trying was Steve Irwin and he didn't win
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 51015
- Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
- Favourite Player: Hodgo
- Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
Didn’t the eels sack him too?
Re: Canberra Raiders sack Curtis Scott
I don't think the NRL ever registered his contract with Parra.
Shoving it in your face since 2017