February 8, 2015

Dear M/s Wilson

Sorry for the delay, the transcript of your 5AA interview only arrived this afternoon.

Item (Wilson) 1 – clearly regurgitating lies from the AFL: “We are still going, well there has been some misreporting that’s been followed up by some correct reporting. From what I can ascertain now that I am back in town Stephen is that it was not true that the players or any small group of players were offered a two-week deal from ASADA or form the AFL’s lawyers. What is true is that they were offered looked at an eight-week situation and that just wasn’t the players who are at Port Adelaide or those involved at the Western Bulldogs, but it was all the players.” 

My Comment:

1. You have no idea what you are talking about. What does “From what I can ascertain” mean? If you haven’t spoken to either Peter Gordon, David Koch, Andrew Dillon, Xavier Campbell or the players or the lawyers, you should just shut up.
   
   
2. The Essendon camp was told, Dillon, under extreme pressure from Peter Gordon, offered the Western Bulldogs and Port Adelaide players suspensions from the NAB Cup and two competition games. 
   
   
3. The current Essendon players were not offered the deal because their lawyers were not involved in the negotiations. However, the lawyers were told about the deal offered to the Bulldogs and Port. As the lawyers believe the players will be cleared, they had no interest in seeking the same offer for the Essendon players as those offered to the Bulldogs and Port;
   
   
4. Further proof came from Stewart Cramerie’s mother Amanda. Mrs Cramerie phoned me late at night and said that Peter Gordon was very keen for Stewart to accept the two-game competition ban deal that he had negotiated with Andrew Dillon.
   
   
5. Irrespective of Port Adelaide’s attitude to the deal, it wasn’t in a position to consider it because it would have exposed David Koch as being one of the world’s biggest hypocrites. Koch shot his mouth off in 2013 in a vitriolic outburst from the pulpit about Hird and the Essendon players. Basically, he opined that anyone involved with banned substances should be banned for life. 
   
   
6. Although Koch is known for putting both feet in his mouth – who could ever forget his disgusting comment about the Prime Minister’s wife Janette Howard or his crass comment about the Christchurch earthquake victims – he thinks a smug apology gets him off-the-hook. If Monfries and Ryder were to admit to taking Thymosin Beta-4, there is no way Koch could allow them to stay at Port.

Item (Wilson) 2: “Now that would tell me that there is genuine belief from all parties that these players could well face suspensions.” 

My Comment:

1. Leaving aside for a second your unacceptable habit of pursuing agendas and vendettas against people, your observation encapsulates other traits that prove you are way passed your “used-by-date”. You have extrapolated this comment from something that is factually incorrect. Current Essendon players were not offered the same deal. 
   
   
2. It is absolute nonsense to suggest the current Essendon players are considering a deal for the following reasons:
   
   i. They don’t believe they were administered banned substances;
   
   ii. Dank testified under oath in May and November 2012 to the ACC that he didn’t administer Thymosin Beta-4 to the players. It is reasonable to assume that if the ACC had evidence to the contrary, it would have charged him with perjury by now;
   
   iii. There is no evidence Thymosin Beta-4 was supplied to Essendon;
   
   iv. Even if we assume Dank wanted to use Thymosin Beta-4, if there is no evidence Thymosin Beta-4 was supplied, Dank wouldn’t know what was in the syringes
   
   v. Although I am sure this is not a consideration for the Essendon players because they believe they are innocent but there is a compelling reason why the tribunal can’t convict any player:
   
   
3. To get you excited let’s assume there is proof Thymosin Beta-4 was supplied to Essendon;
   
   i. Let’s assume the tribunal members have an off-day, week, or months, and are confident one of the amino acids was Thymosin Beta-4;
   
   ii. Let’s assume the tribunal members are sufficiently confident some players were administered Thymosin Beta-4;
   
   iii. In case you have forgotten, 34 players were charged as individuals with being administered Thymosin Beta-4;
   
   iv. How does the tribunal decide who was administered Thymosin Beta-4?
   
   
4. You have scrapped the bottom of the bird cage over the last two years but I can’t believe that you would support finding innocent players guilty just to ensure you catch the alleged guilty players. Your hatred for Essendon and Hird surely doesn’t extend that far!
   
   
5. I suspect the majority of football followers dislike you, but if you are advocating, we change the core of our legal system, then I believe every football follower would advise you to get on your bike and go to a country with that type of legal system.    

Item (Wilson) 3: “I know you’re probably thinking that when I say this, at what point are they going to accept the judges’ decision. Or at least play ball, I mean they agreed to do these interviews with the AFL and ASADA, they agreed to the entire process.” 

My Comment:

1. When the players signed their AFL / Essendon / Player Agreement they knew the AFL could screw them. However, I am sure that none of them believed the AFL (and their mates in the media); law and accounting firms; and ASADA, would get access to their private emails and texts;
   
   
2. The players were assured all evidence would be confidential. Brett Clothier, who had access to everyone’s evidence, was given a second lick of the lolly, and sent an email to ASADA at 12.33pm on 17 July 2013, which was unconscionably accepted as evidence. He was the only ‘witness’ 9 out of 132 witnesses) who wasn’t cross-examined on the content of his alleged evidence.
   
   
3. You regurgitated Clothier’s evidence at 3:00am in the on-line edition of THE(garb)AGE before Clothier sent his email. I can’t imagine that the players ever considered that your relationship with AFL staff was so close that you would be leaked evidence before Clothier created it;
   
   
4. You are talking absolute nonsense when you say the players and staff agreed to the entire process. The players believed they would receive procedural fairness. They weren’t. 
   
   
5. The players and staff didn’t agree to participate in a process that allowed ASADA to change evidence; fabricate evidence; and omit evidence. Clearly, they didn’t agree that ASADA could change the word Thymosin to Thymosin Beta-4 on 51 occasions.
   
   
6. The players and staff definitely didn’t agree to participate in a process in which ASADA was allowed to testify during the investigation. 
   
   
7. The players and staff didn’t agree to a process where Demetriou, McLachlan and Clothier would tell ASADA what could go in the report and what had to be left out. The players were guaranteed confidentiality and, yet, Andrew Dillon published slabs of verbatim text from the Interim Report in his first 34-page charge-sheet.

Item (Wilson) 4: “He [Hird] is doing it to suppress the truth, he doesn’t want the truth to come out.” 

My Comment:

1. Stuart Littlemore where are you? Please volunteer to run Hird’s defamation cases against Wilson and the Age. If Hird and Littlemore tackled you and the Age every time you defamed Hird, they would own Fairfax. Hopefully, they would close the rags down and flog the building.
   
   
2. Would you please substantiate your claim Hird is trying to suppress the truth? 
   
   
3. To my knowledge, you and your two mates, who appear incapable of writing their own articles, were leaked information from the investigation. After I identified 51 leaks in your respective columns, I gave up looking for more. The last time there were so many leaks, Noah built himself an ark. I assumed 51 leaks were sufficient to prove the ACC was as capable as the Keystone Cops and your idols at the AFL and ASADA were naughty boys;
   
   
4. What more do you need to know about the truth?
   
   
5. The Age obviously has an illegal copy of the Interim Report;
   
   
6. Shortly after the start of the investigation in February 2013, you pronounced Hird and Essendon guilty, what else do you want to know?
   
   
7. You were the beneficiary of continuous leaks. Are you suggesting you weren’t given all the salacious leaks?
   
   
8. Dillon published slabs of the evidence in his first 34-page charge sheet; 
   
   
9. Hird testified in public for over a day before Justice Middleton;
   
   
10. The tribunal will only find for or against the players so their judgment won’t enlighten you;
    
    
11. My understanding is ASADA said it would start the investigation again. How then is Hird trying to suppress the truth?
    
    
12. If you tell me why you have had a change of heart, and why you suddenly want to know the truth, as a gesture of goodwill, tell me what you want to know and I will tell you. 
    
    
13. I can’t understand why you haven’t made similar demands on the AFL for the truth. Every time the AFL looks like it has to appear in court and talk under oath – Dr Reid and Dean Robinson for example – it runs away. And let’s not forget the bullying of Essendon and Hird for Hird to stop his Supreme Court case. 
    
    
14. One of the most crucial pieces of truth concerns Hird’s legal responsibilities for the supplement programme. You have repeatedly said he was in charge. I have repeatedly explained to you that the Victorian OH&S Act, the Essendon matrix organisation structure and Hird’s job description, meant he had no legal responsibility. But you weren’t interested in the truth. You don’t want the truth because you can’t handle the truth. (thanks Jack)
    
    
15. M/s Wilson, it’s time. I suggest you ask Andy, “I didn’t inject anyone but metaphorically speaking I sat back and didn’t try and stop the players receiving 10,000+ injections”, to write you a reference.

Bruce Francis