No Oppo Supporters Marlion Pickett Arrested

[tugga]

RICHMOND premiership player Marlion Pickett

50

Marlion Pickett

Age

32

Ht

184cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.0

3star

K

7.5

3star

HB

5.5

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

3.3

5star

CL

1.5

4star

D

11.7

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

5.0

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

3.6

4star

CL

1.3

4star

D

12.8

4star

K

7.2

3star

HB

5.6

4star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.6

4star

has been granted bail by a Perth magistrate after being charged over a string of alleged burglaries in which currency was stolen from safes.

Police remanded Pickett in custody on Sunday - a day after he played in the Tigers' 15-point win over Fremantle at Optus Stadium - alleging he was involved in commercial burglaries between December and January.

The 31-year-old appeared in the dock in Perth Magistrates Court on Monday, wearing a black sweatshirt.

He only spoke to confirm his name and was not required to enter pleas.

A police prosecutor told the court the alleged offending by Pickett and others involved a series of commercial burglaries resulting in the theft of more than $380,000 in Australian and foreign currencies from within safes.

Pickett is facing 12 charges including four counts of aggravated burglary, three counts of stealing and three counts of criminal damage.

Prosecutors opposed bail, saying there was a risk Pickett would reoffend if he was released.

Pickett's lawyer David Manera said the prosecution case rested largely on allegations deposits were made into his bank account by his co-offenders and that a camper-van rented in his name was driven interstate by the other men.

Magistrate Erin O'Donnell said the allegations were serious but she was confident Pickett did not present a significant flight risk.

She granted bail on the condition Pickett resides at his address in the Melbourne suburb of Reservoir, reports weekly to a local police station, does not interact with his alleged co-offenders and provides a $50,000 personal surety.

 

[SunshineBoy]

There is nothing about it…It was definitely a filing hearing today (19th Jan)…
Maybe the accused doesn’t have to appear yet, but it’s still weird…
Marlion’s lawyer David Manera said from the start, it’s circumstantial…
And if it wasn’t, Marlion would not be training in Vic…

So still not got past the commital stage , a lot ado about noth(not so far

 

[Groupie_]

theyre waiting to ping him on the day of his 100th game..

 

[juss]

His involvement in the crime is from the police, that doesn't make it true. That would be a strange precedent, to act on charges without going to trial. Until the truth comes out, then he is innocent.

The association with Kurtley has not helped, but for all we know he barely knew him, or if he did had no knowledge of his crimes. Trial by association is not really fair either because that is a very broad brush and a pretty dangerous precedent as well.

I'm not for sacking him, but I also understand the case to provisionally suspend him pending the investigation as some other codes do.

The reason is, you are never proven innocent in the eyes of the law. You are either found guilty, or not guilty. A small but important difference than being innocent.

Marlion may or may not have some form of fault in the alleged crimes, which morally and ethically and culturally might not make him innocent in it all. However, that doesn't mean he will be found guilty and being found not guilty doesn't necessarily absolve him in all that.

I wouldn't be against the club taking either stance, but I have to trust what the club is doing. If they keep him on, fine, if they provisionally suspend him until the case, I'd also be fine with that judgement call.

As a player, I dont think he's best 22 anyway and I hope we don't see him much at AFL level because I hope some younger better options go past him regardless.

 

[Grrr]

I'm not for sacking him, but I also understand the case to provisionally suspend him pending the investigation as some other codes do.

The reason is, you are never proven innocent in the eyes of the law. You are either found guilty, or not guilty. A small but important difference than being innocent.

Marlion may or may not have some form of fault in the alleged crimes, which morally and ethically and culturally might not make him innocent in it all. However, that doesn't mean he will be found guilty and being found not guilty doesn't necessarily absolve him in all that.

I wouldn't be against the club taking either stance, but I have to trust what the club is doing. If they keep him on, fine, if they provisionally suspend him until the case, I'd also be fine with that judgement call.

As a player, I dont think he's best 22 anyway and I hope we don't see him much at AFL level because I hope some younger better options go past him regardless.

That's a broad brush. How would you ever prove yourself innocent of something you are charged with.

 

[juss]

That's a broad brush. How would you ever prove yourself innocent of something you are charged with.

In the eyes of the law you don't. Thats the distinction between not guilty and innocent, and it's deliberate. In the legal system it means there is not sufficient evidence to find a verdict of guilt, it does not mean you are morally innocent. I'm not saying that's the case with Marlion, but I don't think it gets to this point without him having some form of behaviour or involvement that we'd rather not have one of our players be tarnished with.

 

[Tigerturbulance]

That's a broad brush. How would you ever prove yourself innocent of something you are charged with.

You never can, that's why the old age expression of the "mud sticks"
Whether he's innocent or not, some of the mud will stay stuck

 

[SunshineBoy]

I'm not for sacking him, but I also understand the case to provisionally suspend him pending the investigation as some other codes do.

The reason is, you are never proven innocent in the eyes of the law. You are either found guilty, or not guilty. A small but important difference than being innocent.

Marlion may or may not have some form of fault in the alleged crimes, which morally and ethically and culturally might not make him innocent in it all. However, that doesn't mean he will be found guilty and being found not guilty doesn't necessarily absolve him in all that.

I wouldn't be against the club taking either stance, but I have to trust what the club is doing. If they keep him on, fine, if they provisionally suspend him until the case, I'd also be fine with that judgement call.

As a player, I dont think he's best 22 anyway and I hope we don't see him much at AFL level because I hope some younger better options go past him regardless.

Again there hasn’t been enough evidence for the magistrate to commit him to trial , if it was so cut and shut the pigs wouldnt be asking for extension after extension, are they trying to fabricate evidence? I know this is Australia and our cops are angels ……but

 

[LTT]

In the eyes of the law you don't. Thats the distinction between not guilty and innocent, and it's deliberate. In the legal system it means there is not sufficient evidence to find a verdict of guilt, it does not mean you are morally innocent. I'm not saying that's the case with Marlion, but I don't think it gets to this point without him having some form of behaviour or involvement that we'd rather not have one of our players be tarnished with.

You don’t have to be proven innocent. The law says you are innocent until proven guilty. Therefore if you are not guilty then you are innocent

 

[Grrr]

In the eyes of the law you don't. Thats the distinction between not guilty and innocent, and it's deliberate. In the legal system it means there is not sufficient evidence to find a verdict of guilt, it does not mean you are morally innocent. I'm not saying that's the case with Marlion, but I don't think it gets to this point without him having some form of behaviour or involvement that we'd rather not have one of our players be tarnished with.

Unless you are actually innocent. What if Marlion had absolutely no idea what his cousin was up to. He could have lied to him easily, Pickett gave him money etc on good faith. We won't know until the trial. You seriously want to not give a guy a chance because he may be guilty by association.

 

[Grrr]

You never can, that's why the old age expression of the "mud sticks"
Whether he's innocent or not, some of the mud will stay stuck

Perhaps, so should we play him in the meantime? Club has said yes.

 

[Drunken Wookie]

needs wilkins' lawyer

 

[Tigerturbulance]

Perhaps, so should we play him in the meantime? Club has said yes.

I support the clubs stance to play him.
They would have spoken with him to hear his version of the story and how he is handling the issue mentally, emotionally etc and whether he is in a position / mind space to focus on playing or step away to focus on this RL issue. The club and MP would have come to a mutual agreement to keep moving forward as they are doing and I for one love they are supporting our player which in this woke world is the hard road to take.

 

[juss]

Therefore if you are not guilty then you are innocent

That's not actually true, and certainly not in our legal system. The verdict would be guilty or innocent if that was the case. The language used is very deliberate in our legal system.

A person found not guilty basically (legally) means there was not enough evidence to meet the standard of proof which is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Defence only needs to place enough doubt in mind for a jury to vote not guilty, which again does not make someone innocent.

The legal system does not prove, nor attempt to prove innocence. It proves guilt, or if guilt is not proven then the verdict is not of guilt, or not guilty.

Pickett's defence could literally and legally rock up to the court if it went to trial and say "prove it" and then sit down. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove guilt, it is not on the defence to prove innocence, therefore if the prosecution can't prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the verdict is not guilty - it does not morally prove innocence, that's the shit that always sticks unfortunately and why it's unfortunate he finds himself in this situation.

I'll back the club on their decision either way, but it's not up for debate that not guilty doesn't automatically prove Marlion had no wrong doing at all in this case.

 

[juss]

Again there hasn’t been enough evidence for the magistrate to commit him to trial , if it was so cut and shut the pigs wouldnt be asking for extension after extension, are they trying to fabricate evidence? I know this is Australia and our cops are angels ……but

That's good, we all hope he hasn't done anything wrong and that this doesn't distract his or the clubs focus this year.

As mentioned before on field I don't even consider him best 22 so I don't think there are massive playing implications for us.

 

[tigerfan1961]

That's good, we all hope he hasn't done anything wrong and that this doesn't distract his or the clubs focus this year.

As mentioned before on field I don't even consider him best 22 so I don't think there are massive playing implications for us.

How do you know he won’t be best 22? Played out of position for basically all of last season, thereby sacrificing his own game for the teams benefit.
Wing ain’t the walk in the park many on here seem to think by nominating Rioli, Short, Banks, Sonsie etc. To be a decent winger, you need great endurance, for us you need to be a decent mark of the footy, and you need great tackling ability and defensive skills.
Marlion has shown in seasons past that he possesses all of those abilities, he wins the hard ball, never ever flinches in a contest situation and he runs great patterns all game. Yes, he’s aging and will need replacing some time soon but if he’s training well and shows great form in practice games, he deserves to be best 22. From all reports, he came back to pre-season both early and in ripping shape, and has been training very well. Yet you seem to write him off
Yze and the rest of the coaches will gauge form in the upcoming practice games and I’ll back Marlion in that he shines and is there for our first game.

 

[juss]

How do you know he won’t be best 22? Played out of position for basically all of last season, thereby sacrificing his own game for the teams benefit.
Wing ain’t the walk in the park many on here seem to think by nominating Rioli, Short, Banks, Sonsie etc. To be a decent winger, you need great endurance, for us you need to be a decent mark of the footy, and you need great tackling ability and defensive skills.
Marlion has shown in seasons past that he possesses all of those abilities, he wins the hard ball, never ever flinches in a contest situation and he runs great patterns all game. Yes, he’s aging and will need replacing some time soon but if he’s training well and shows great form in practice games, he deserves to be best 22. From all reports, he came back to pre-season both early and in ripping shape, and has been training very well. Yet you seem to write him off
Yze and the rest of the coaches will gauge form in the upcoming practice games and I’ll back Marlion in that he shines and is there for our first game.

That's a long reply to just not considering a player not best 22, someone has to miss out don't they?

When putting my group of players together I don't consider him in the best side I can find if everyone is healthy, factoring in expected improvement from the younger players and building a list win our next flag.

Wing: Macintosh, Graham, Ross, Banks, Short, Clarke, Tresize, Brown I would give a go ahead of him.

Forward: Cumberland, Bolton, Martin, Baker, Lynch, Kozi, (Gibcus?, Balta?) Bauer, Sonsie, Coulthard would be in the mix before him.

Mid: Taranto, Martin, Hopper, Prestia, Sonsie, Ross, Dow, Bolton (McAullife?), Short I'd probably say would rotate through before him.

Then you have versatile guys like D Rioli who can probably chip in both back, mid and forward when needed.

I dont see him as better than any of our defensive options.

He's a depth player, in my view. Will probably play games with form, injuries at different times and as sub, but he would not be in my best possible team if we had the full list to pick from. Of course he will play some games though.

 

[All Aust]

Marlion in 23 was to a fair degree sacrificed to be a mr fix it for gaping holes created by his coaches and teammates.
It was go to the toilet, bring your own Pledge Lemon. Lesson from 23 is for others to step up when

Big Sexy cannot play and, or
Our Ruckmen are getting towelled.

My hope for Marlion is that there can be some enjoyment through relief in 24.

 

[Not Important]

There is nothing about it…It was definitely a filing hearing today (19th Jan)…
Maybe the accused doesn’t have to appear yet, but it’s still weird…
Marlion’s lawyer David Manera said from the start, it’s circumstantial…
And if it wasn’t, Marlion would not be training in Vic…

yet i have an uneasy feeling about him. my guess is if he was an average player he wouldn't be in our colors now.

 

[ms3]

In the Herald Sun today

 

[_RT_]

Next court date is March 1st at 9.30am WA time.

His charges are:
4 x Aggravated Burglary and commit
3 x Criminal Damage or Destruction of Property
3 x Stealing
1 x Attempted Stealing
1 x Receiving

 

[Bojangles17]

I'm not for sacking him, but I also understand the case to provisionally suspend him pending the investigation as some other codes do.

The reason is, you are never proven innocent in the eyes of the law. You are either found guilty, or not guilty. A small but important difference than being innocent.

Marlion may or may not have some form of fault in the alleged crimes, which morally and ethically and culturally might not make him innocent in it all. However, that doesn't mean he will be found guilty and being found not guilty doesn't necessarily absolve him in all that.

I wouldn't be against the club taking either stance, but I have to trust what the club is doing. If they keep him on, fine, if they provisionally suspend him until the case, I'd also be fine with that judgement call.

As a player, I dont think he's best 22 anyway and I hope we don't see him much at AFL level because I hope some younger better options go past him regardless.

I think that’s being unreasonable under the circumstances of presumption of innocence, the clubs or afl wouldn’t go anywhere near standing down a player as it would fuel rage over being marginalised

 

[Bojangles17]

yet i have an uneasy feeling about him. my guess is if he was an average player he wouldn't be in our colors now.

He is pretty average

 

[SunshineBoy]

Next court date is March 1st at 9.30am WA time.

His charges are:
4 x Aggravated Burglary and commit
3 x Criminal Damage or Destruction of Property
3 x Stealing
1 x Attempted Stealing
1 x Receiving

It’s still only a commital hearing , there a fair bit of water to flow under that bridge yet

 

[juss]

I think that’s being unreasonable under the circumstances of presumption of innocence, the clubs or afl wouldn’t go anywhere near standing down a player as it would fuel rage over being marginalised

I'm just saying if that was the club stance I wouldn't be against it, but clearly they don't believe that.

I think the NRL do something similar called the no fault stand down. Players are stood down under the assumption of no fault until the outcome of their trial, for serious charges. Not sure what qualifies as a serious charge or not.

The AFL might one day follow suit with a similar policy?

 

[Daka]

Any law experts in here? does the delay mean bad or good news for Pickett & Richmond?