Hoops

Creek in trouble for trying to avoid fine via Facebook

Pfft, love brokers > lawyers

Welcome back TR. You beat me to the response to Lovebroker above, I would never insinuate that you were a criminal defence lawyer!

I would be prepared to be corrected but the list of crimes you can be convicted of attempting to do (or taking preparatory steps to do) is quite small. For example, you cannot be convicted of attempting to exceed the speed limit no matter how hard you try. I once asked to borrow Isaac's Ferrari with intent to exceed 100km per hour on Hindley St but luckily for me Isaac said no.

Still, Mitch showed he needed social media training and a bit of common sense kicked in to him years ago. His country larrikan act makes him personable and media friendly but I am disappointed he has failed to learn some pretty simple lessons along the way. Not acceptable. This is a guy who wants an NBA contract following a summer league this year? NBA teams will have little time for a 25 year old who has yet to grow up.

Thanks Statman. Let's see how long it takes for the kids to run me out...

Consorting doesn't even remotely come close.

I have faith that the 36ers would of done their due diligence here. Sporting clubs highly tend to let criminal matters proceed, usually on the advice of police and/or integrity units and then follow up with additional penalties from the club and the sporting body (NRL/NBL/AFL) once that person has been convicted of that offence.

Seriously, get over it already FFS. Who gives a s&$t? The NBA is playoffs are on, focus on that stuff. Lovebroker, we should all live like Ned Flanders right? Dumb mistake, everyone is over it with the exception of 2or 3 forum people trying to poke an apparent hornets nest.

Seeking someone to take the points publicly is an offence or not? I don't understand all the legal stuff that happened earlier however I would have thought " consorting" or what ever tha appropriate word is would be offence in itself?

Welcome back TR - your common sense has been missed!

Consider this my official unveiling and return to the forum.

Only semi-retired from Hoops then!

18 years and still going strong Isaac.

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but is Lovebroker arguing with a lawyer about the law and a former policeman about firearms charges in this thread?

Hellalujah.....

I seriously hope you are not a criminal defence lawyer.

The relevant criminal act is swearing a false statutory declaration. You cannot be convicted of intending to take that step and then not doing it.

The offence in these types of matter is for signing false declarations. Until you sign that false declaration then what crime has been committed?

You've used a keyword (attempted) yet remain blissfully unaware of its meaning.

No Lovebroker. You've committed a number of offences, ranging from acts endangering life to depending on your reasons, attempted murder. I'm just lucky you're a s**t shot, but lets also throw in a raft of other offences and we won't go into the licence/possession offences; that would be loading you up with charges. (Firearms Act 1977 might be worth reading along with the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935).

You've committed those crimes because you actually did the deed.

In this case, Creek mentioned the deed, but didn't do it or follow through with it and (to the best of my knowledge) luckily for him, not having someone actually agree to go through with this stupid idea of his.

If they had, and signed the appropriate paperwork such as statutory declaration or authority from the Motor Registry and then lodged it and then got found out, both Creek and the moron agreeing to this the idea would be in strife.

It would be a struggle to prove that someone conspired with themselves to commit an crime in this case.

As I mentioned earlier, being stupid isn't a crime.

I doubt you would be guilty of nothing at all but the fact does remain that intent but failure to commit a crime is punished far less severely than actually committing one

So apparently I can take a gun, take a shot at TR, but be guilty of nothing because I missed.

I never said it was good. It was stupid and a terrible look for the player and club.

Stupidity isn't a crime, if it was a large percentage of the population would be in trouble.

But he is the captain and a role model yadda yadda yadda, so it is about public perception. Not good.

Did Creek have someone else sign a statutory declaration declaring they were the driver?

Did Creek sign a statutory declaration declaring he wasn't the driver?

Did Creek have someone sign the authority naming another driver and then lodge that authority with the Motor Registry?

Did Creek at anytime nominate another driver to any other authority (police)?

I'd suggest you have an understand of knowing the different between committing a criminal act and doing something stupid on Facebook. An offence would of been committed in any of the above had/has taken place.

Just putting it out there, I'm not a fan of the bloke, I think he's overrated and the 36ers have tied too much time, dollars and effort into him and not seen a return on that investment.

Intention to commit a crime via fraud is serious outside of Adelaide.

Like it was said above Sixers have gone quiet about it.

Very worrying.

God it would be so nice to be blithely unaware of the world.

I haven't had that since I was 3.

Seems some are able to hold onto that deep into their adulthood.

and I've come out of my HoopsSA retirement for this...

What crime?

He posted a stupid comment on FB, that's not a crime.

Every jail in the world would be full and the courts over run if posting stupid stuff on FB was a crime.

So Angus I meant TR above you.

^ Thank you for proving my point so succinctly.

The definition of criminal is someone who has committed a crime, so...

How's this criminal?

"It's not "poor judgement," a "brain fade," nor a "stuff up."
Posting on FB was pure stupidity, but the underlying act is criminal."

I think this is a fair comment.

Using throwaway words like brain fade downplays the seriousness of what he was attempting to do.

There is the criminal element to this which is very serious. The government has warned about points 'sharing?' before and has a very dim view on such activity. Please be aware that this is an indictable offence which can attract a custodial sentence, its not a laughing matter.

My concern is with the 6ers organisation. Creek is the captain, therefore he should be held at a higher standard of conduct. Note: I don't mean he cannot speed, or drive so poorly that he loses his licence. But the subsequent act of attempting to share his points takes it to a new level.

He is the face of the club and likely a role model, this conduct is simply not becoming of a club captain.

My next concern is with the lack of response from the Sixers themselves, its been almost a week. As a concerned fan, I want to know what their resolution will be.

So has there been any formal response from the Sixers?

Got to love all the tunnel-visioned Adelaide supporters leaping to defend Creek.
It's not "poor judgement," a "brain fade," nor a "stuff up."
Posting on FB was pure stupidity, but the underlying act is criminal.

heheh yes indeed. Sounds like he may need to go on one of those safe driver courses than and hes all foam no beer :)

A lot of colourful details have emerged re: Creek's personal life on here over the last few days!

Seriously, there is no need to get personal here.

Creek stuffed up, let the legal process and the 6ers own disciplinary process take its place. Mitch should learn from it. We should all move on.

Anon, you were warned.

Anon, this is not the place to slander an individual. Be careful what you say next.

He probably friended Boti.

Wonder which one of those "friends" shared it to the media?

What kind of favours?

Anyone who has Creeky on fb knows he is constantly asking a favour but this is too far. Really silly brain fade for the captain

I have been told by an official (fines enforcement person) in Adelaide that SA has the harshest traffic infringement penalties in Australia. I got caught in a rental for 7 km/h over. I tried to have it waived due to it being trivial and having a clean record for nearly 20 years. In NSW it would have been waived ( they even publish it in their consumer advice) but not in SA. They also tried to add huge overdue fees caused by the letter arriving late and their online payment system not working. Got those waived though.

SA govt needs needs all the revenue it can raise. I think he has 2 choices: pay the fine and boast on Facebook about donating money to help build new stadia for the kids to play in, or go to court with a good lawyer and try to make a case to do community service instead of copping a conviction and demerit points. He could offer personal training and coaching for disadvantaged youth (maybe not lessons in social media though).

In this thread: an IBM 286 CPU reference... and basket weaving!

surely 7kph over is the most minimum fine you can get?

Mitch is up Ship Creek, what do you think AAMI?

lol... just picturing him stuffing up weaving a basket...

surely 7kph over is the most minimum fine you can get? Makes it even more stupid and highlights a lot more indiscretions in the past if he's lost that many points already that that would hit him hard...

Sure, it's not getting busted with coke at the Ivy level stupid, but pretty bone-headed...

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/basketball/adelaide-36ers-captain-mitch-creek-in-trouble-after-trying-to-avoid-a-speeding-fine-via-facebook/news-story/e014cbe075582e2571139b21ead10636?nk=c5863175d278ee52c27a32190e843a37-1494054656

no pay wall there, But I now understand the reason for the mohawk/head shave, clearly the ol' Creek noggin has a design problem that when under pressure it generates a heat fail due to insufficient heat dissipation, just like my old 286 cpu IBM machine, hopefully the loss of that hair insulation fixes the problem somewhat, but possibly not when driving.

Good thing he never went to college in the US, those basket-weaving classes for freshmen athletes can be brutal.

Not defending the post Zodiac, certainly shouldn't post on social media, but don't come in on your high horse acting like you do everything by the book. Bottom line, it was a brain fade on his part.

57 in a 50 zone is pretty tame as far as discretions come.

Does that mean he has no close mates? Why not ask them in private rather than a public plea on Facebook? Or are they all hoons too?