Kurtley Beale

[Rugby Mum 2]

That's your second post referring to Patston's alleged history at Maroochydore in a few minutes. Seriously, in this whole saga, that was the most tabloid, gossipy, irrelevant piece of rubbish printed and that's the bit you've grabbed with two hands.
Instead of focussing on the apparent inaccuracies in what Beale presented to the tribunal, or the fact that he sexually harassed a co-worker and then lied about it you've essentially labelled the victim as a habitual extortionist. Bravo sir!

It isn't alleged - it is based on court documents lodged in Queensland Supreme Court in 2008.

All this could have been sorted by her appearing in front of the Tribunal so that she could be cross examined. Now it is just slander as her statements can't be tested by Beale. She will be angling for an out of court settlement from the ARU to keep it quiet rather than going to court and be fully tested, is my guess.

This entire thread is based on gossip.

 

[Train Without a Station]

It's fair to query Patson's character. I'm not sure how it changes anything.

Beale has admitted his guilt.

In her past she was involved in a law suit which the defendant settled. If they were in the wrong, how does it reflect on her character?

Do we disregard testimony of victims who have already been the victim of a crime?

 

[I like to watch]

C

?.....Thirdly, what makes you think this is the first time that Patston has tried to talk to the press?

C'mon Ash,
You can't seriously suggest that a journo passed up an opportunity to be able to quote her on this topic?

 

[Ash]

C'mon Ash,
You can't seriously suggest that a journo passed up an opportunity to be able to quote her on this topic?

edit: All I will say is, yes.

 

[Ash]

BTW, @TahDan, if Wayne Smith's article is correct, Beale lied to Patston in his apology for his message, which she only just found out about.

 

[RugbyReg]

C
C'mon Ash,
You can't seriously suggest that a journo passed up an opportunity to be able to quote her on this topic?

yes.

 

[Ash]

It isn't alleged - it is based on court documents lodged in Queensland Supreme Court in 2008.

All this could have been sorted by her appearing in front of the Tribunal so that she could be cross examined. Now it is just slander as her statements can't be tested by Beale. She will be angling for an out of court settlement from the ARU to keep it quiet rather than going to court and be fully tested, is my guess.

This entire thread is based on gossip.

You mean you missed the bit where Beale was found guilty by tribunal, and admitted to sending an offensive message?

 

[Slim 293]

It isn't alleged - it is based on court documents lodged in Queensland Supreme Court in 2008.

It has absolutely no relevance to this case.

 

[Braveheart81]

Seriously, I know people are tip-toeing around this because there's a lot of people reducing this issue to "if you talk about anything but Beale being a sexist harrasser, you're condoning sexism and bullying", but this is an individual who did try to sue a local council for hundreds of thousands over a spider bite.

In one of your previous undeleted posts you referred to this as extortion.

Can we make it crystal clear that taking someone to court is pretty much the opposite of extortion.

It is following due process and unlike extortion is not a crime.

 

[Muglair]

Ash, sorry operating without a mouse, too much for me to do quoting from different pages.

The Wayne Smith article is confusing and probably incorrect.

It says that in the June 9 MMS Beale sent both the offensive texts to Patston. That is surprising as it conflicts with the Tribunal's findings based on the forensic transcript sent.

My reading is that seems KB (Kurtley Beale) attempted, for whatever reason, to send the first text to Hansen and accidentally sent it to Patston. Contrary to Slim's and my previous posts disclosing Hansen's name and number was probably unavoidable as KB (Kurtley Beale) probably had to show that he sent it to her by accident.

I would have thought if he sent it on purpose or had also sent the second text then he would have to be gone already.

 

[TahDan]

It has absolutely no relevance to this case.

Again, it goes to character. She sought over half a million dollars in damages because a spider bit her. As I said, you can lie to yourselves all you like, but you all know how you'd have reacted if you read that in isolation of this.

Now fellas, I don't particularly care for Beale and I'd be happy if they'd have just kicked his dumb ass out for this.

BUT, I also am less than impressed with how all this has panned out over MONTHS, and based on some of the reports - one of which was based on court documents - I also reckon Patston's character isn't exactly squeaky.

 

[Ash]

Ash, sorry operating without a mouse, too much for me to do quoting from different pages.

The Wayne Smith article is confusing and probably incorrect.

It says that in the June 9 MMS Beale sent both the offensive texts to Patston. That is surprising as it conflicts with the Tribunal's findings based on the forensic transcript sent.

My reading is that seems KB (Kurtley Beale) attempted, for whatever reason, to send the first text to Hansen and accidentally sent it to Patston. Contrary to Slim's and my previous posts disclosing Hansen's name and number was probably unavoidable as KB (Kurtley Beale) probably had to show that he sent it to her by accident.

I would have thought if he sent it on purpose or had also sent the second text then he would have to be gone already.

Incorrect. He forwarded the messages from a previous conversation, according to the article and what Beale admitted. The second message was included by accident, and Beale was not the original author.

That was Beale's defence.

 

[Slim 293]

Ash, sorry operating without a mouse, too much for me to do quoting from different pages.

The Wayne Smith article is confusing and probably incorrect.

It says that in the June 9 MMS Beale sent both the offensive texts to Patston. That is surprising as it conflicts with the Tribunal's findings based on the forensic transcript sent.

No, the article states that Beale sent the text a week before he accidentally sent it to Patston.

Beale then apparently lied to Patston and told her that he hadn't sent the texts to anyone else.

Among the second text(s) was the supposed "more offensive" image which Beale denies came from his phone.

 

[Muglair]

Actually if Wayne Smith has seen evidence of a 9 June MMS from KB (Kurtley Beale) with both images and the forensic examination of KB (Kurtley Beale)'s phone showed the 9 June MMS from his own phone had only one image then it is pretty easy to see why someone might conclude the 2 image MMS was tampered with.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

It isn't alleged - it is based on court documents lodged in Queensland Supreme Court in 2008.

All this could have been sorted by her appearing in front of the Tribunal so that she could be cross examined. Now it is just slander as her statements can't be tested by Beale. She will be angling for an out of court settlement from the ARU to keep it quiet rather than going to court and be fully tested, is my guess.

This entire thread is based on gossip.

There are limits to what you can be cross examined upon.

 

[Slim 293]

Again, it goes to character.

I think it speaks more to your character............

 

[mst]

I think you can find many stories where the punishment handed down to the culprit is considered too lenient by some. I think in almost any situation at any level of severity, the suffering of the victim and those close to them is likely to be greater than the punishment given to the offender.

A tribunal reviewed the evidence presented to them and came up with a punishment by determining all the factors (both aggravating and mitigating).

Clearly the punishment for sexual harassment is not to be sacked for any and all sexual harassment regardless of the severity. Zero tolerance does not mean that someone is terminated if found guilty of any offence. It just means that there are consequences for any offence.

Clearly the punishment for sexual harassment is not to be sacked for any and all sexual harassment regardless of the severity.


I think you need to look around a bit harder. There are many who have been sacked for this. Off the top of my head I can think of 17 recently in defence.

I can even think of Public servants recently being sacked for tweeting public criticism of there own departments.

I think you can try to trivialise this with generalisations but you are merely adding fuel to the fire. Treating the public with contempt as they have and insulting the public intelligence is just more of a display of ignorance and how out of touch the ARU and some factions are, and that's on top of the demonstration of stupidity that abounds us.

FACT - we have a player, who is on public record being sanctioned on several other occasions for behavioural issues and it has been suggested was on his last chance.

FACT - the same player has provided, in writing, a confession

FACT - there is another allegedly more offensive text (It seems to be a new legal principle that we compare texts sent by different people about different things to determine how offensive something is considering a basic legal principal is each count on its own merits - and based on the decision directing an offensive message at you using your name is less offensive than calling you something random!)

FACT - there are other players involved and no action to identify them

FACT - there was no transparency as it was all behind closed doors, and before ARU hand picked persons

FACT - there is a difference between what is offensive to a female and male. How many females were involved in the Beale hearings/ decision?

FACT - why have people, including the victim, quit?

FACT - the player has been continually defended by team mates for an act (behaviour) that is unacceptable

To be clear, its your right to defend these issues as you choose, but lets be clear, you are in the minority, and rightly or wrongly it doesn't matter. This is the peoples game and the public will judge rightly or wrongly. As is being made very clear in the media, the public will judge, and are doing so - and they are the ones that will determine the fate of the game.

If its a choice of a player, or players over the game its an easy choice.

 

[TahDan]

In one of your previous undeleted posts you referred to this as extortion.

Can we make it crystal clear that taking someone to court is pretty much the opposite of extortion.

It is following due process and unlike extortion is not a crime.

Not strictly, but you'd be disingenuous if you were to tell me that you don't believe many civil cases are brought purely to force a settlement (hence the massive sums sought).

Again, I just think that if you blokes had read that someone tried to sue for half a mill over that you'd have rolled your eyes.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Again, it goes to character. She sought over half a million dollars in damages because a spider bit her. As I said, you can lie to yourselves all you like, but you all know how you'd have reacted if you read that in isolation of this.

1. Spider bites have been known to kill so nothing flows from the fact that it was a spider bite unless you have seen the medical evidence about it.
2. It is customary to claim the limit of the jurisdiction of the court in which the case was commenced - so nothing flows from the amount claimed.
Other than that, keep up the wild speculation.

 

[Braveheart81]

Again, it goes to character. She sought over half a million dollars in damages because a spider bit her. As I said, you can lie to yourselves all you like, but you all know how you'd have reacted if you read that in isolation of this.

Now fellas, I don't particularly care for Beale and I'd be happy if they'd have just kicked his dumb ass out for this.

BUT, I also am less than impressed with how all this has panned out over MONTHS, and based on some of the reports - one of which was based on court documents - I also reckon Patston's character isn't exactly squeaky.

You conflating multiple issues here.

Anything relevant to Patston's character is completely irrelevant to Kurtley Beale unless somehow you're able to correlate the biting habits of spiders with the sexual harassment perpetrated by a rugby player.

It may be the case that Patston wasn't suited to the role she was put in. It may be the case that she could have handled matters better once they started unfolding. Neither of those things have anything to do with Kurtley Beale.

It is clear that Patston's actions were reasonable for someone who had been sexually harassed.

Those actions might not have been ultimately in her best interests if she wanted to remain employed by the ARU or in the best interests of the ARU in dealing with an issue but that is also irrelevant to what Kurtley Beale did.