Uh oh... looks like another wasn't breast fed here .....this and have serious mummy/wimmin issues. Pity, but again, Giz, Frenchyjen, this is not an excuse to take this out on young girls.
Anyway, getting back to reality...
I suggest you read the full response from Derryn Hinch at
http://www.3aw.com.au/derryn-hinch-blog: 27/12/2010 "
A good lawyer could argue they were in a position of authority at that school visit if rendezvous plans were made. Section 48 of the Victorian Crimes Act raises the age of consent to 18 where the child is under the care, supervision or authority of the adult with whom they had sexual intercourse. S. 48 (1) A person must not take part in an act of sexual penetration with a 16 or 17 year old child to whom he or she is not married and who is under his or her care, supervision or authority. Penalty: Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum). This is why it is imperative for the St Kilda players’ defence that they first met the girl weeks later after the game in Sydney."
Then there's the matter of 'respect and responsibility' policy concerning their email leaks, (several before the girl began leaking photos onto her facebook)... Saints or Sinners... How about we let the children's courts decide, given she is afterall a minor still.
http://www.afl.com.au/portals/0/afl_docs/afl_hq/Policies/Respect%20&%20Responsib...Our little lady is being represented now, and even if she decided to leak more pics, they would need to prove that those leaks actually came from her this time, ie....with laptops being 'stolen' and all....recall how the saints reported their laptops stolen so they could prepare for an imminent leak several months back?
Oh and recall how they were texting on her nude images also?
hahah
Well, young girls do go to partys, what if someone had have accessed her pic-folder without her knowing at a party a few months back.... this and then began leaking these images themselves, without her knowing, claiming they were sent from a friend from a friend? Or just turned up on 4chan one night?
What ever leaks from now on could have been leaked by anyone...anyone with access to her laptop any time before the court ordered her to destroy what she had.
Anything could have happened prior to then...including the proliferation of these images which she herself cant be held responsible for finding their way into the wrong hands, before she was ordered by the court to destroy them.
They think they have scared a little girl with a pissant court order not worth the paper it's printed on...this and think it will stop them going viral.
Think again!

Because I heard a little rumour, they already have.