13. BAKER MCKENZIE

BAKER & MCKENZIE 7 FEBRUARY 2013

RE: Club link to drug dealer

Richard Baker, Nick McKenzie, Cameron Houston, Caroline Wilson

Item 1: “A CONVICTED drug trafficker who calls himself Dr Ageless supplied the Essendon Football Club’s sacked sports scientist with potentially illegal supplements.”

My Comment:

Dr Ageless (Shane Charter) never supplied Stephen Dank with any substance. As it transpires, Charter’s full body and luggage search by customs proved that he didn’t bring in any substances on his 3 December 2011 entry to Australia.
This is appalling journalism designed to put Essendon in the worst possible light. Using, the term “potentially illegal supplements” was in breach of point four of the summarised Age Code which states that “Staff should seek to present only fair, balanced and accurate material.” There is no such thing as a potentially illegal supplement. WADA has only two categories legal or illegal supplements. This comment was made six days after ASADA and the AFL agreed to an investigation. It hadn’t even interviewed its first witness. It was unfair to taint the Essendon players.
The authors produced no proof Dr Ageless supplied supplements to Essendon, let alone the name of the supplements.
Using the term potentially illegal supplements made as much sense as saying Baker, McKenzie and Houston were potential rapists because they had penises.

Item 2: “Ageing Australia’s website promotes the use of testosterone and human growth hormone. The website features a photograph of a model injecting a needle into her stomach.”

My Comment:

Further evidence that the authors are trying to paint the worst possible picture of Essendon. The model has nothing to do with Essendon.
Baker and McKenzie had no evidence on 7 February 2013 to describe it as a scandal.
The law of averages suggests that there would be a number of diabetics employed by the Age/Fairfax media. Some would inject themselves in the stomach. Furthermore, there may even be some heroine uses. The authors would be outraged if Essendon people painted a picture of the Age workplace full of people injecting themselves in the stomach and arms

Item 3: “Biochemist Shane Charter is alleged to have provided Stephen Dank – a central figure in the scandal – with supplements sourced from Asia.”

My Comment:

Alleged by whom? As it transpires, during his ASADA interview, Shane Charter testified that he never supplied Essendon or Dank with a single substance.
The point of this comment was to imply all supplements from Asia are illegal, which is untrue

Item 4: “It is understood Mr Dank worked closely with Mr Charter to provide players with supplements, which are believed to have cost as much as $30,000. Mr Dank is believed to have been sacked after the club discovered unauthorised expenditure.”

My Comment:

Point four of the summarised Age code insists that all reports must be accurate. Using the terms understood and believe indicated that the authors were not certain their report was accurate. What does ‘understood’, mean? Dank either worked with Charter or he didn’t.
“Provided players with supplements”. Players from where? If the authors had evidence Essendon players were supplied illegal supplements from Asia, they should have named the supplements. They didn’t have such evidence, so, they sneakily used innuendo to create a picture of wrong-doing at Essendon.
Believed by whom to have cost as much as $30,000? To have nominated a figure of $30,000 someone must have seen an invoice. The authors should have produced details from the invoice.
“Dank is believed to have been sacked”. The authors didn’t have evidence that Dank was sacked, let alone the reason he was sacked. Once again appalling journalism in breach of the various codes of ethics

Item 5: “Mr Charter, a former champion weightlifter, has advised some of the AFL’s best players and other sports stars on nutrition and supplements to boost performance.”

My Comment:

More innuendo, made to taint the Essendon players.
The authors breached the codes by not naming the supplements.
By using the expression “supplements to boost performance”, the authors were trying to create the impression they were illegal supplements.
The proof of the deceitfulness of the authors in trying to make such a link is to be found on the Australian Institute of Sport website which boasts about cutting edge supplements which enhance performance.

Item 6: “He was arrested by Victorian drug squad detectives in 2004 and found to be in possession of 100,000 pseudoephedrine-based tablets – a precursor chemical used to make speed – in bottles labelled vitamin B supplements. He pleaded guilty and received a reduced prison sentence after striking a deal with Crown prosecutors to give evidence against his co-accused, who was later cleared.”

My Comment:

A further attempt to denigrate Essendon, despite not having offered any evidence of a link between Carter and Essendon, let alone that he supplied illegal named supplements.

Item 7: ‘Mr Charter declined to comment on Wednesday. However, a supporter of Mr Charter’s confirmed his association with Essendon and said he had provided the club with ”vitamins”.’

My Comment:

“A supporter”. What does that mean? Who was the supporter? What does the supporter do that would enable him to know of Carter’s association with Essendon. The authors breached the codes by not detailing what “vitamins” Carter allegedly supplied to Essendon.
As it transpired, Charter didn’t supply a single substance to either Stephen Dank or Essendon.
The authors were guilty of gutter journalism by using inverted commas around the word vitamins. To the uninitiated the authors used the inverted commas as a wink, wink, nod, nod, to imply they were sinister vitamins.

Item 8: “The supporter also said Mr Charter had written to the Therapeutic Goods Administration last year seeking clarification on certain types of peptides.”

My Comment:

In attempting to give their source some credibility, the authors have unwittingly given Charter some credibility by stating he was interested in knowing which supplements were legal and which weren’t.

Item 9: “But another source on Wednesday said Mr Charter, who is the director of a company called Dr Ageless Pty Ltd, had imported from China peptides that were on Australia’s prohibited import list.”

My Comment

More innuendo in an attempt to denigrate Essendon.
The authors offered no evidence Charter imported any peptides from China, let alone peptides that were on the prohibited import list.
The authors offered no evidence that Essendon players were supplied peptides that were on the prohibited import list.

Item 10: “Sources in the supplement and bodybuilding industry said it was well known that Mr Charter operated on the cusp of the law and promoted the use of peptides to some of his clients.”

My Comment:

Baker, McKenzie and Wilson have more sources than Heinz. They may have retained some respect as journalists if they had bothered to name a couple.

WADA has two classifications. Supplements are either legal or illegal. There isn’t a category called “those on the cusp”. If Carter were driving at 60kph in a 60kph zone he would be driving on the cusp. But he would be driving within the legal speed limit.

Item 11: “Australian health authorities are understood to have scrutinised Mr Charter and his associates over their importation of certain products.”

My Comment:

“Understood”, here we go again. Understood by whom? Over time a number of Age journalists would have had their tax returns scrutinised by tax inspectors. That doesn’t mean they broke the law. It doesn’t mean by association that Baker, McKenzie and Wilson cheated on their tax. It also doesn’t mean Charter broke the law.

Item 12: “Ageless Australia’s website promotes the use of testosterone and human growth hormone. The website features a photograph of a model injecting a needle into her stomach.”

My Comment:

Guys you painted this picture for us in item 2. Unless the model is a nude sticking a needle into herself, I’m not interested in picturing this action a second time.

Item 13: ‘The clinic’s owner, Laurie Williams, said on Wednesday night that his clinic had nothing to do with Essendon and that Mr Charter ”would be sacked before morning”.’

My Comment

At last, a direct quote from a named source.
This was backing the field each way. Informing the reader that Charter would be sacked congers up a feeling of wrong doing by Charter.
Including a comment that Williams’s clinic is a belated attempt for the authors to be seen to be even-handed. The only trouble was the authors had laid on the innuendo so thick that Essendon was guilty, many readers would have stopped reading by this

Item 14: “Mr Charter is believed to have established contact with Essendon through his relationship with Mr Dank and former AFL players.”

My Comment:

Great to see Essendon mentioned. This article should have been labelled the Reader’s Digest biography of Charter’s.

“Believed”. Here we go again. Believed by whom? Where is the evidence?

Item 15: “Mr Charter previously advised top sportsmen on their fitness, including Olympic swimmer Scott Miller and Brownlow Medal winners Shane Woewodin and Ben Cousins. Fairfax Media is not suggesting any of his former clients ever acted improperly.”

My Comment:

This is deplorable journalism which is in breach of the various codes of ethics. To write a balanced article the authors should have mentioned a number of the other stars without drug links who Charter helped. Instead, they have thrown in two of the highest profile drug-uses in an attempt to implicate Essendon.
The whole article has been built around innuendo and then the authors disingenuously throw in Fairfax Media was not suggesting any of his former clients ever acted improperly. This was bottom of the birdcage journalism.

Item 16: “A source aware of Mr Charter and Mr Dank’s activities with Essendon said ”Steve Dank made them [supplements] and Charter was importing them”. Mr Dank has not returned calls or texts from Fairfax Media.”

My Comment:

The authors have used so many sources I think they must have skipped over the road to Kraft because Heinz had run out.
Once again, no evidence has been provided that Dank made [the supplements]. No evidence was provided that Charter imported them. No suggestion was made that Essendon players were involved, let alone evidence they were involved. No evidence was provided that the alleged supplements were illegal.

Item 17: “Essendon’s suspended fitness boss, Dean Robinson, has engaged a lawyer from the AFL Coaches Association to deal with this latest controversy, having sought legal advice last year when he was on the verge of being sacked by the Bombers. Robinson has refused to comment.”

My Comment:

This was a statement. It threw no light on whether Essendon players took illegal supplements. It just added to the innuendo, of which the authors are masters.
The claim that Evans self-reported was a lie. ASADA and the AFL agreed to undertake an investigation on 1 February 2013. Thus, it was IMPOSSIBLE to self-report on 5 February 2013.

Item 18: “One of the alleged supplements given to players was bovine colostrum. This contains a growth factor called IGF-1 that is on the banned substances list of the International Olympic Committee and the World Anti-Doping Agency.”

My Comment:

“Alleged substances”. Alleged by whom?
In fairness to the authors this was technically a major break-through because for the first time they actually named an alleged illegal supplement. However, it meant nothing because they did not produce any evidence that any player used it. This comment was unfair in that the authors were tainting all Essendon players without being certain their story was accurate.

Item 19: “Senior Essendon players did demand assurances from their coaching and medical staff before being administered the controversial substances.”

My Comment:

“Controversial substances”. The authors must think all their readers are stupid. The authors had only named one alleged illegal substance but didn’t offer any proof that that substance was used by any of the players. Without naming the substances, the authors were not in a position to even claim they were “controversial substances”. Substances are either legal or illegal. There isn’t a controversial category.

Item 20: “A specially convened meeting of Bombers senior-listed players and the AFL Players Association on Wednesday heard that the forms were signed in the presence of Essendon senior coaching staff, doctors and the fitness staff. Coach James Hird, who on Wednesday voiced his support for the suspended Robinson, witnessed the forms being handed out and signed.”

My Comment:

In an email to an acquaintance, Hird said: “She [Wilson] accuses me of standing over the players and making them sign waivers. Her exact words are something like the most damming piece of evidence to come to light so far is when I stood over the players as they signed waivers… It is another lie as I never saw any player sign anything and did not see the completed document in question until February last year (2013).

Item 21: “The players also signed a separate confidentiality agreement after being told the club did not want its controversial practices being leaked to opposition clubs.”

My Comment:

Who told the players?
Although the authors didn’t use quotation marks around the words “controversial practices” it is make-believe to even hint that someone described them as controversial practices.

Item 22: “Retired player Mark McVeigh said that he had only been given vitamin B and C injections in a sterile environment, believed to be in a house close to Windy Hill, with a registered nurse present.”

My Comment:

It’s too late for the authors to pretend they were even-handed. They laid on the innuendo so thick the average reader would already have found the players guilty. Any decent journalist trying to fulfil his obligations under the Age code would have placed this comment towards the top of the story.

General Comment:

This was a disgraceful article based on innuendo which continually breached the Age Code of Conduct.
Any article that contains the following should be thrown in the bin: “Potentially illegal supplements”; “is alleged: (with no accompanying evidence); “understood” (by no source mentioned); “are believed” (by no source mentioned); “is believed”; “a supporter”; ‘“vitamins”’ (quotation marks were used to imply something more sinister); “the supporter”; “another source”; “Sources”; “well known” (by unnamed sources); “are understood”; “is believed”; “a source”; “alleged supplements”; “Senior Essendon players”; “controversial practices”;
Later on, in one of the most idiotic comments imaginable, AFL chief executive, Andrew Demetriou said “They are very fine reporters, the fellows from the Age, Baker and McKenzie. People don’t print things like that unless they are sure about their facts.”
This was Alice in Wonderland stuff. If it weren’t so serious, it would be laughable. Demetriou should have been sacked by the Commission, after due process, after this comment. First, he was endorsing all Baker and McKenzie said. Second, he was implying that everything that is printed must be true because “people don’t print anything unless they are sure about their facts”. This was tantamount to telling the world anything you read from here-on-in, on Hird and Essendon, must be true because it wouldn’t be printed if the writer weren’t sure of her facts.
Like Wilson, Baker and McKenzie were the beneficiaries of leaked information from the ASADA-AFL investigation. The material was leaked because the leakers knew the information would damage Hird and Essendon. In using the leaked material, Baker, McKenzie and their boss at the Age, knew, or should have known, they had become quasi members of the AFL’s PR machine. Consequently, it was impossible for them to be objective in any further articles. Their boss should have taken them off the story.

Conclusion

Members of the jury, Baker and Mackenzie, Andrew Demetriou’s favourite double act. But as you reflect upon the evidence, the cold hard facts, you will not be able to come to any other conclusion that their partnership should be re-named Half-Baked and Source Mackenzie. They are the world’s greatest living example of a gossip-monger’s ability to put one and one together and come up with a million. Potentially illegal drugs … which one of them wants to take credit for that line, Abbott or Costello, Laurel or Hardy? Though mention of those two great comedic duos does discredit to at least two people – the straight men in the partnerships.
Nothing was straight about Half-Baked and Source Mackenzie’s approach to this issue. They bent and they twisted. I wonder what every person given all their inoculations for their next overseas trip feel about that. Demetriou gave their game up early in the piece, they were to be his convenient mouthpiece on Caro’s days off. Two very find journalists Andrew? Your understanding of the accountability that goes along with signing up to The Age’s code of ethics is as bad as your understanding of Occupational Health and Safety regulations.