Source :- PERTH NOW NEWS
The AFL is “incredibly relaxed” over its own investigation into former Carlton president Luke Sayers and the dick pic saga that will continue to be heard in the Supreme Court.
Sayers has lost his bid to have the defamation case heard in private (in the Family Court), which will now be heard by a judge-alone (no jury) in the Victorian Supreme Court.
Cate Sayers also lost her bid to have a jury to decide on the case and the allegation that her estranged husband, Luke, and a member of the Carlton board defamed her.
Luke Sayers stepped down from the Carlton presidency at the start of 2025.
His decision followed an AFL investigation into the lewd photo scandal, but the league has faced repeated questions about its own probe which allegedly cleared Sayers of any wrongdoing based solely on his testimony to the integrity unit.
“Officially the league’s saying tonight they couldn’t be any more relaxed on the matter,” 7NEWS chief AFL reporter Mitch Cleary said on Channel 7’s The Agenda Setters on Wednesday.
“They say this is simply a matter between Cate and Luke Sayers because they feel at the time when they dealt with this from an integrity unit perspective, they dealt with the facts that were in front of them.
“So the AFL tonight are incredibly relaxed from their point of view.
“They’re saying that if anyone has lied in a (statutory declaration) that is on them, the AFL was simply acting with what they had in front of them at the time.”
Cate Sayers claims her husband defamed her in a statuary declaration, which accused her of accessing his X account, posting a photograph of his genitalia in January 2025 and tagging a female executive at Bupa.
The document was sworn by Luke Sayers in the weeks after the controversial post, which was quickly deleted, as the AFL and Carlton conducted investigations.
Cleary said Luke Sayers’ former adviser and crisis manager Sharon McCrohan — who now works at the AFL — can expect to be subpoenaed.
“These are the sort of people that will be brought forward and subpoenaed as part of this process,” Cleary said.
“But the AFL tonight is saying that they are comfortable that anything brought forward in their subpoenas won’t reveal any wrongdoing from their side of things.”
Supreme Court Justice Andrew Watson on Wednesday rejected Luke Sayers’ application for the case to be moved, finding the Supreme Court was the more appropriate venue for a defamation claim.
“This court has a long history of trying defamation proceedings,” the judge wrote in his published reasons.
“There is no doubt that judges of the Family Court would have the requisite skills and experience to decide a defamation matter in that court but there are, in my view, features of this case which mean that it is not more appropriate to transfer this proceeding to that jurisdiction.”
Stream The Agenda Setters live or watch anytime on-demand at 7plus
An important function of defamation proceedings was giving defendants the chance to vindicate their reputations, the judge said.
“The Family Court has strict provisions restricting publication regarding the course of proceedings in that court,” Justice Watson said.
“I accept Cate’s submission that those provisions sit at odds with the vindication function that a defamation trial would ordinarily serve.”
– With AAP
