After a two month investigation, he's now been charged with rape. Here's an article:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 5830569433

Could be the end of his career, and a big dent in St Kilda's 2010 premiership hopes.

im just annoyed stkildas name gets dragged through all this, i mean he hasnt even played a game for us, barely even trained with us. hopefully brett peake can provide the speed we need

thats what you get for signing someone like Lovett
its the same deal with Fevola
As well as the gun player you get all the history that comes with them, which is the reason why he was kicked out of the blues

dissapointing to say the least...

He has been officially sacked by the Saints. It's on the AFL site.

And I don't think Fevola and Lovett are in the same boat.

what a shocker of a draft for us, lost pick 16, ball and lovett

Do not disagree, but you didn't really lose Lovett, rather threw him out. I wonder if the whole Lovett saga might galvanise the Saints for the season ahead?

meh glad its over, there would have been a clear clause in the contract that said if you play up we have the right to terminate your contract. And i hope so jerry, plus its not as if all the guys were best mates with lovett, had barely been training with saints before it happened.

glad to see him booted before the start of the season, didn't want it to linger into the premiership season and become a distraction for the team. don't see how this puts a dent in our premiership hopes for 2010 at all, to be honest.

You know, I hope St Kilda get burnt here and are forced to pay out at least some of his contract. I think he is a douchebag, but that is beside the point. Lovett has been charged with rape, not convicted. Yet St.Kilda think that they can sack him and that he has no right for a grievance hence. Seriously come on. St.Kilda stuffed up.

Totally disagree. Im on the clubs side in regards to this. Good on them for making a stand.

Why would a business want to assosiate themselves with a rapist? Are you saying they should have let him hang around?

Whether he is a rapist or not is known by only two people...him and the girl accusing him. In this country we still work on a system of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

I think the Saints were out of line for sacking him based on an allegation. He wouldn't be the first sportsman falsely accused of sexual assault. But nor would he be the first to commit the act.

None of us (including the StKilda Football Club) know the circumstances of the case, so who are we to play judge, jury and executioner? The law says he is entitled to his day in court and a fair trial, a courtesy which should also extend to his job.

You also missed out on pick 27 was it? For ball, because of some oversized egos = Poor recruiting and a bit of bad luck on the lovett case......(innocent until proven guilty??? )

I dont know.............

woop you got in there and stole some of my thunder grinners

That's fine Grinners, I respect that view also. There have been lots of allegations in the past, but they are usually found to be BS by the Police who investigate. It is a serious allegation, so what im saying is Police wouldnt have charged him if there wasn't enough evidence to proceed / produce in Court.

The club did the right thing in distancing themselves .... Im more pissed that Lovett was selfish and didn't distance himself from the club. Im by no means a fan of Saints or Essendon, but I think how Lovett conducted himself was wrong, and at the end of the day will only hurt Football.

Again, if Lovett believes he has done nothing wrong, why should he distance himself from the club?

As for your comments about police only laying charges if there is enough evidence, rape is in many ways a different story. In the end, if there is evidence that the pair had a sexual encounter, but one says that it was rape, then it is not for the police to decide who is telling the truth. In the absence of further evidence either way, then the matter is put before a court for the decision to be made.

I don't know the details of the case against Lovett, but the evidence on hand could be as simple as an admission by him that he had sex with the woman, or a witness that can say that he/she saw them both at the same place and saw them go together to where the alleged rape occurred.

I have this little tax problem at the moment grinners.........you know... if you have the time.

Nice to see you're one of those lynch mob mentalities. He has been charged with rape, not convicted. There is a difference.

It is at this point where the football club should be supporting him. Not throwing him aside. They can always sack him once a verdict has been passed. Football clubs have such double standards.

When you say double standards, why do the names "Leigh Montagna" & "Stephen Milne" spring to mind?

Apparently what was acceptable in 2004 isn't now. Although the police ended up not charging them with anything due to 'insufficient evidence', I don't recall them between barred from the club while the allegations were being investigated....

Recieved an additional charge .... Not looking good for the lad.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/former ... 5863655602

truely disgusting story