News Jack de Belin to sue Daily Telegraph

foREVerA7X

Kennel Established
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
667
Reaction score
839
Jack de Belin, who is currently suspended by the NRL, has started defamation proceedings against The Daily Telegraph over a front-page story, cartoon and tweet labeling de Belin as a rapist and a “despicable person”, as reported by The Sydney Morning Herald.

Lawyers for de Belin are seeking damages, including aggravated damages and legal costs for a story that was published on February 21st last year which was headlined “Rub Out the Grubs: League Immortal draws line in sand on NRL shame.”

The front-page story, which featured an interview with Kangaroos coach Mal Meninga, said that Meninga “wants the NRL to bench stars charged by police during the code’s summer of shame until their cases are heard by courts”.

“Meninga told The Daily Telegraph yesterday accused rapist Jack de Belin should be suspended immediately while he contests a rape charge and the NRL had to act on violence against women,” the report said.

De Belin is also suing over a tweet which linked the story as “Kangaroos coach says NRL bad boys should be stood down from playing.”.

Lawyers for de Belin say that the story and tweet defamed him by making suggestions that he is “a rapist” and a “despicable person in that he raped a woman”.

Those same accusations that were conveyed by the front page together with the cartoon, featured Meninga grabbing the throat of a man who is wearing a football jersey with the word “creep” printed across the chest. The man in the jersey is in turn grabbing the throat of a woman.

De Belin’s lawyers also state that the front page in combination with the reports on pages 4 and 5, also defamed him by making allegations that de Belin “so conducted himself by raping a woman that he deserved to miss out on being picked for the Australian rugby league team”.

De Belin lost a federal court challenge last year against the Australian Rugby League Commission’s no-fault stand-down rule, meaning de Belin has been sidelined since until his case is heard.

The Telegraph report which labeled de Belin as a rapist, was published before de Belin’s suspension was announced.

De Belin and Shellharbour Sharks player Callan Sinclair were charged with aggravated assault on a 19-year old woman last year in December, in which both men have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Both were set to face a two-week jury trial on February 3rd, but Wollongong District Court Judge Andrew Haesler delayed the pre-trial commencement until April 8th to allow an anonymous witness to recover from an illness before giving evidence.

Judge Haesler has now also said that due to District Court scheduling issues, de Belin’s trial may not begin before August.

De Belin’s lawyers are also trying to get the story and tweet permanently removed from the internet.

De Belin’s legal party are seeking aggravated damages on a number of bases, including that the Telegraph did not look for a response from de Belin before the article was published online, and that the material was presented in an “over-sensationalised manner noting the language, tone and production style”, which was seen as an “intent to injure” him.

Both parties are set to appear in court for the first of a number of preliminary hearings on March 30th.
 

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,198
Reaction score
26,005
What was wrong with what Meninga said? Any legal eagles on here know?
 

doggieaaron

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
15,645
Reaction score
11,323
Id say jacks lawyer will be buying a new Investment property soon with all the fees he’s getting from jack
 

steeliz

Kennel Addict
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
7,138
Reaction score
7,913
What was wrong with what Meninga said? Any legal eagles on here know?
I think the point his lawyers are suing on is that the story was written is a way that it came across as Meninga implied that he was guilty.

Can't do that before a trial. They will probably argue that it may have influenced potential jurors and that it went against the presumption of innocence that we are all entitled to.
 

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,198
Reaction score
26,005
I think the point his lawyers are suing on is that the story was written is a way that it came across as Meninga implied that he was guilty.

Can't do that before a trial. They will probably argue that it may have influenced potential jurors and that it went against the presumption of innocence that we are all entitled to.
Who has responsibility, Meninga, or the Smellagraph? On a side note, in my work I see quite a bit of court case material, maybe its just me but it seems like the guiltiest people are always the ones who jump up and down about defamation the fastest.
 

Docta

Kennel Participant
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
152
Reaction score
277
What was wrong with what Meninga said? Any legal eagles on here know?
Nothing with Meninga’s comments, it’s the publication by the telegraph relating to heading ‘Rubbing grubs out of the game’. De Bellen alleges the representations made by that publication (as understood by a ordinary person) are he is ‘a rapist’ and a ‘despicable person’.

While I’m personally not a fan of the telegraph, De Bellin’s case has some significant problems:

1) The defence of truth negates any defamatory remarks (the telegraph will argue Meninga was alluding to De Bellen and the serious allegations against him as charged).

2) The publication would have not had the effect of damaging De Bellin’s reputation in the community (again given the charges laid against him).

This is very different to Jeffrey Rush’s case where the telegraph pretty much labeled him a monster and the telegraph tried to rely on the defence of truth but the Court found otherwise (no police charges and the telegraphs source wasn’t credible).
 

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,198
Reaction score
26,005
Nothing with Meninga’s comments, it’s the publication by the telegraph relating to heading ‘Rubbing grubs out of the game’. De Bellen alleges the representations made by that publication (as understood by a ordinary person) are he is ‘a rapist’ and a ‘despicable person’.

While I’m personally not a fan of the telegraph, De Bellin’s case has some significant problems:

1) The defence of truth negates any defamatory remarks (the telegraph will argue Meninga was alluding to De Bellen and the serious allegations against him as charged).

2) The publication would have had the effect of damaging De Bellin’s reputation in the community (again given the charges laid against him).

This is very different to Jeffrey Rush’s case where the telegraph pretty much labeled him a monster and the telegraph tried to rely on the defence of truth but the Court found otherwise (no police charges and the telegraphs source wasn’t credible).
So they have a stronger position here than they did against Rush? De Bellin is rolling the dice, and this could be read as a bit of desperate move, especially given he's already lost in court once so far.
 

Docta

Kennel Participant
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
152
Reaction score
277
So they have a stronger position here than they did against Rush? De Bellin is rolling the dice, and this could be read as a bit of desperate move, especially given he's already lost in court once so far.
Yep they jumped the gun.

Rush sued the telegraph who attempted to defend the proceedings by relying on a source (who alleged Rush sexually assaulted her during a stage production).Telegraph called her as a witness but judge simply didn’t believe her.
 

Motorhead

Kennel Enthusiast
Premium Member
2 x Tipping Champ
Joined
Mar 9, 2019
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
3,412
Hope the Telegraph get taken to the cleaners. Gutter publication full of absolute fuckwits who are quick to throw stones but then go into hiding once their own misdemeanours are brought to light (James Hooper vandalizing that car on a pissy bender being a case in point).
Meninga should probably keep his mouth shut too considering his brother is a convicted murderer.
 

B-Train

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
32,738
Reaction score
48,787
Where is De Bellin getting the money to fund all of this litigation?

Is this one last desperate attempt to get some money back in the form of damages to help pay the legal bills and make up for lost income?

IF he's found guilty of rape and launched a lawsuit against the NRL and the media while awaiting trial, then he'd be an even bigger piece of work than the most defamatory articles made him out to be.

If he's proven innocent, then Greenberg and the NRL will be facing more lawsuits from De Bellin seeking compensation for a loss of income etc..

Either way it's going to get messy and none of it is good for the game.
 

Bad Billy

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
16,668
Reaction score
12,721
So they have a stronger position here than they did against Rush? De Bellin is rolling the dice, and this could be read as a bit of desperate move, especially given he's already lost in court once so far.
He’s a fucken idiot. Everytime he loses he makes himself look more guilty.
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,844
Reaction score
12,154
Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I reckon players should be able to play as usual (when you have a trial, you don't stop work), however they shouldn't be eligible for rep selection - that's all.

Case in point, Josh Reynolds. He was completely innocent. Imagine the egg on the face of the NRL if they suspended Josh and as proven yesterday, he was innocent all along!
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,587
Reaction score
16,637
Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I reckon players should be able to play as usual (when you have a trial, you don't stop work), however they shouldn't be eligible for rep selection - that's all.

Case in point, Josh Reynolds. He was completely innocent. Imagine the egg on the face of the NRL if they suspended Josh and as proven yesterday, he was innocent all along!
The standing down rule is only on the most serious of charges (i think its something with a max penalty of >10 years).

Also, in many jobs, you would be fired/stood down in the same situation (not saying i agree or disagree necessarily with the NRL's policy though - I think they are simply looking at the "greater good", rightly or wrongly).
 

Howard Moon

Kennel Addict
2 x Gilded
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
3,445
the media, along with the NRL have sealed his fate.. unfortunately we will never know the truth
 

KambahOne

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
3,659
Reaction score
4,736
the media, along with the NRL have sealed his fate.. unfortunately we will never know the truth
100% agree, he's damaged goods. Maybe he's realising this and that's the reason for this litigation?
 

Scoooby

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Gilded
Joined
Mar 6, 2018
Messages
16,496
Reaction score
15,714
These days it seems the system is so corrupt, especially in America etc that it’s always guilty until you fight hard to prove your innocence.
 

The DoggFather

ASSASSIN
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
107,354
Reaction score
119,457
A shit **** sueing a bunch of shit *****....

It's win-win for us whatever happens.
 
Top