AUSSIE & KIWI Boxing News

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
The Daily Telegraph are linking Tim Tszyu with Shane Mosley Jnr and Anthony Mundine. They are speculating November.
 
May 22, 2013
3,028
1,502
Australia
Just saw a video on facebook of kambosos on the pads. Heaps of comments bringing up that he should fight Paul Fleming.

Got me thinking, what happened to Fleming? I see on boxrec he only fought once last year. There used to be a bit of hype on him especially with his Top Rank contract.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
Just saw a video on facebook of kambosos on the pads. Heaps of comments bringing up that he should fight Paul Fleming.

Got me thinking, what happened to Fleming? I see on boxrec he only fought once last year. There used to be a bit of hype on him especially with his Top Rank contract.
In the main a wasted career so far. He just seems to fight over matched imports, one after the other.

That said the guy Fleming beat in his last fight was well credentialed.
 
Reactions: Super_Fly_Sam

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
Death of David Hookes

David Hookes died at the hands of 22 year old bouncer and light heavyweight boxer Zdravko Micevic just over 15 years ago.

I have heard all the rumours of what went down that night and probably been guilty of believing way too many of them. I doubt I am alone there.

Well I was listening recently to an interview with retired former detective Charlie Bezzina, who investigated Hookes' death, and finally got to hear the true story. Here is a snippet:

Micevic landed a single punch, a left hook. The incident occurred approximately 90 metres from the Beaconsfield Hotel where Hookes had been drinking and from where Micevic had ejected him. The blow appeared to render Hookes unconscious before he hit the ground, as his hands made no attempt to cushion his fall. As a result Hookes' head the pavement with such force he would ultimately die.

The media announced Hookes was in a bad way - which he most certainly was - but the reality is Bezzina, a homicide cop, got the call at 10pm that night. So right from the start it wasn't expected Hookes would survive.

Micevic was subsequently arrested but plead self defence on the basis he claimed Hookes grabbed him and struck him twice in the stomach prior to Micevic landing the single blow to Hookes.

Altogether there were approximately 30 witnesses to the incident. They consisted of fellow cricketers who had been drinking with Hookes at the hotel, other patrons leaving the hotel, neighbours watching from the balconies of their nearby homes and a couple of Micevic's fellow bouncers from the hotel.

Now this is the big one for me. Not one of the 30 witnesses. Not one, says they saw Hookes grab or punch Micevic.

Normally in such cases where a person had been killed as a result of a single blow, the maximum possible charge had been aggravated assault, or something similar, and Bezzina had been involved in investigating 5 or 6 previously. But in this case, because Micevic was a boxer and because of how far away from the hotel it occurred, Bezzina and the Department of Public Prosecutions went for manslaughter.

Zdravko Micevic was subsequently charged with manslaughter. However, after hearing Micevic's evidence, which included claims Hookes struck him first and that Hookes was argumentative and threatened to publicly criticize hotel staff, the jury acquitted Micevic, by then 23.

The law has changed quite dramatically in the 15 years since David Hookes' death, and now deaths resulting from coward punches, as they are referred to now, carry a 10 year sentence.

I have not posted this in an attempt to condemn in any way Zdravko Micevic. As a matter of fact I went and watched him box some time after the David Hookes incident.

Charlie Bezzina also mentioned how remorseful Micevic was and that he had requested to be allowed to meet Hookes' family face to face to apologize for what he had done.

David Hookes' former wife Robyn took civil action against Micevic after the not guilty verdict was delivered in court and received an undisclosed settlement.
 
May 22, 2013
3,028
1,502
Australia
Death of David Hookes

David Hookes died at the hands of 22 year old bouncer and light heavyweight boxer Zdravko Micevic just over 15 years ago.

I have heard all the rumours of what went down that night and probably been guilty of believing way too many of them. I doubt I am alone there.

Well I was listening recently to an interview with retired former detective Charlie Bezzina, who investigated Hookes' death, and finally got to hear the true story. Here is a snippet:

Micevic landed a single punch, a left hook. The incident occurred approximately 90 metres from the Beaconsfield Hotel where Hookes had been drinking and from where Micevic had ejected him. The blow appeared to render Hookes unconscious before he hit the ground, as his hands made no attempt to cushion his fall. As a result Hookes' head the pavement with such force he would ultimately die.

The media announced Hookes was in a bad way - which he most certainly was - but the reality is Bezzina, a homicide cop, got the call at 10pm that night. So right from the start it wasn't expected Hookes would survive.

Micevic was subsequently arrested but plead self defence on the basis he claimed Hookes grabbed him and struck him twice in the stomach prior to Micevic landing the single blow to Hookes.

Altogether there were approximately 30 witnesses to the incident. They consisted of fellow cricketers who had been drinking with Hookes at the hotel, other patrons leaving the hotel, neighbours watching from the balconies of their nearby homes and a couple of Micevic's fellow bouncers from the hotel.

Now this is the big one for me. Not one of the 30 witnesses. Not one, says they saw Hookes grab or punch Micevic.

Normally in such cases where a person had been killed as a result of a single blow, the maximum possible charge had been aggravated assault, or something similar, and Bezzina had been involved in investigating 5 or 6 previously. But in this case, because Micevic was a boxer and because of how far away from the hotel it occurred, Bezzina and the Department of Public Prosecutions went for manslaughter.

Zdravko Micevic was subsequently charged with manslaughter. However, after hearing Micevic's evidence, which included claims Hookes struck him first and that Hookes was argumentative and threatened to publicly criticize hotel staff, the jury acquitted Micevic, by then 23.

The law has changed quite dramatically in the 15 years since David Hookes' death, and now deaths resulting from coward punches, as they are referred to now, carry a 10 year sentence.

I have not posted this in an attempt to condemn in any way Zdravko Micevic. As a matter of fact I went and watched him box some time after the David Hookes incident.

Charlie Bezzina also mentioned how remorseful Micevic was and that he had requested to be allowed to meet Hookes' family face to face to apologize for what he had done.

David Hookes' former wife Robyn took civil action against Micevic after the not guilty verdict was delivered in court and received an undisclosed settlement.
I had forgotten completely about this.
Bad ingredients all around really. Lads getting drunk and argumentative, a bouncer who I'd say most likely had some tough guy complex going on. Just a terrible situation.

Strange that he was acquitted if no witnesses saw any attacks on him or at least not guilty of some lesser crime.

Also in this case while it is sensitive because someone died.. but genuine question, I'm confused as to how Hookes' wife could mount a successful civil outcome?
I would have thought that would be open and closed case, Jury found him not guilty of any criminal wrong doing and that pretty much they agree he acted in self defence (otherwise surely he would have been found guilty of something). So why could she seek a civil compensation???
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
I had forgotten completely about this.
Bad ingredients all around really. Lads getting drunk and argumentative, a bouncer who I'd say most likely had some tough guy complex going on. Just a terrible situation.

Strange that he was acquitted if no witnesses saw any attacks on him or at least not guilty of some lesser crime.

Also in this case while it is sensitive because someone died.. but genuine question, I'm confused as to how Hookes' wife could mount a successful civil outcome?
I would have thought that would be open and closed case, Jury found him not guilty of any criminal wrong doing and that pretty much they agree he acted in self defence (otherwise surely he would have been found guilty of something). So why could she seek a civil compensation???
Former detective Bezzina said that when he was shown where the incident occurred - 90 meters away from the hotel - he straight away thought Micevic was working outside his jurisdiction. But because of past noise complaints the bouncers were under instruction from the management to ensure patrons not only left the hotel, but also the surrounding area, and in a quiet manner.

I believe the jury adjudicated on two counts - one being manslaughter and the other some kind of assault charge. How they found him not guilty of both when every single witness said Hookes neither grabbed Micevic, nor struck him, is beyond me.

As far as the civil case goes, civil cases I am assured are quite different but I'm not going to try and explain how because I don't know.
 
May 22, 2013
3,028
1,502
Australia
Former detective Bezzina said that when he was shown where the incident occurred - 90 meters away from the hotel - he straight away thought Micevic was working outside his jurisdiction. But because of past noise complaints the bouncers were under instruction from the management to ensure patrons not only left the hotel, but also the surrounding area, and in a quiet manner.

I believe the jury adjudicated on two counts - one being manslaughter and the other some kind of assault charge. How they found him not guilty of both when every single witness said Hookes neither grabbed Micevic, nor struck him, is beyond me.

As far as the civil case goes, civil cases I am assured are quite different but I'm not going to try and explain how because I don't know.
Sounds like normal bouncer behaviour to be honest. Follow them a good distance from the pub and be quick to put hands on someone.

Fair enough on the civil case though. It just boggles me because rightly or wrongly the jury found him not guilty which to me sounds like they thought he acted in self defence....... Very strange she could win a payout from someone who acted in self defence. Obviously a massive difference between the legal and civil worlds.

Either way though, that's not to say she didn't deserve it or anything just thoughts on the case.
 
Nov 14, 2015
9,613
9,782
Death of David Hookes

David Hookes died at the hands of 22 year old bouncer and light heavyweight boxer Zdravko Micevic just over 15 years ago.

I have heard all the rumours of what went down that night and probably been guilty of believing way too many of them. I doubt I am alone there.

Well I was listening recently to an interview with retired former detective Charlie Bezzina, who investigated Hookes' death, and finally got to hear the true story. Here is a snippet:

Micevic landed a single punch, a left hook. The incident occurred approximately 90 metres from the Beaconsfield Hotel where Hookes had been drinking and from where Micevic had ejected him. The blow appeared to render Hookes unconscious before he hit the ground, as his hands made no attempt to cushion his fall. As a result Hookes' head the pavement with such force he would ultimately die.

The media announced Hookes was in a bad way - which he most certainly was - but the reality is Bezzina, a homicide cop, got the call at 10pm that night. So right from the start it wasn't expected Hookes would survive.

Micevic was subsequently arrested but plead self defence on the basis he claimed Hookes grabbed him and struck him twice in the stomach prior to Micevic landing the single blow to Hookes.

Altogether there were approximately 30 witnesses to the incident. They consisted of fellow cricketers who had been drinking with Hookes at the hotel, other patrons leaving the hotel, neighbours watching from the balconies of their nearby homes and a couple of Micevic's fellow bouncers from the hotel.

Now this is the big one for me. Not one of the 30 witnesses. Not one, says they saw Hookes grab or punch Micevic.

Normally in such cases where a person had been killed as a result of a single blow, the maximum possible charge had been aggravated assault, or something similar, and Bezzina had been involved in investigating 5 or 6 previously. But in this case, because Micevic was a boxer and because of how far away from the hotel it occurred, Bezzina and the Department of Public Prosecutions went for manslaughter.

Zdravko Micevic was subsequently charged with manslaughter. However, after hearing Micevic's evidence, which included claims Hookes struck him first and that Hookes was argumentative and threatened to publicly criticize hotel staff, the jury acquitted Micevic, by then 23.

The law has changed quite dramatically in the 15 years since David Hookes' death, and now deaths resulting from coward punches, as they are referred to now, carry a 10 year sentence.

I have not posted this in an attempt to condemn in any way Zdravko Micevic. As a matter of fact I went and watched him box some time after the David Hookes incident.

Charlie Bezzina also mentioned how remorseful Micevic was and that he had requested to be allowed to meet Hookes' family face to face to apologize for what he had done.

David Hookes' former wife Robyn took civil action against Micevic after the not guilty verdict was delivered in court and received an undisclosed settlement.
I saw a few days of this trial.

If I recall right, there was some evidence given that after the cricketers were ejected, they gradually made their way toward the corner of the pub where there was a dude working the taxis. There was some sort interaction between them there, can't remember if it was physical or verbal, which resulted in the bouncers heading there to move them on and then they all ended up further down the road where the final blow happened.

The vast majority of the cricketing group were either saying they were angels and didn't swear one bit (Sean Graf was the most unbelievable) or couldn't remember hearing or seeing any of the cricketing group do any wrong (pretty much Lehmann's answer to everythingl). Wayne Phillips sounded the most believable out of the group, with him acknowledging that the cricketers were swearing abuse, resisting removal and part of a jostling scrum. It's just really unfortunate Hookes lost his life after an incident that could've been avoided.

Micevic's barrister, Terry Forrest, was very good. Went on to become a Supreme Court Judge.

Micevic during his evidence stood and showed the position he was in when he threw the punch. He said Hookes threw a couple to the body and grabbed hold of him pushing him downward. As Micevic was almost bent over he threw a somewhat looping hook over his head which connected. As the accused, he didn't have to give any evidence but he did and he came across as very genuine in his answers.

As for the civil action, I'd say it would have been settled by the security firm's insurer given all the evidence by the firm during Micevic's trial was that he acted in accordance with his duties in the pub and on the street that night.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
Sounds like normal bouncer behaviour to be honest. Follow them a good distance from the pub and be quick to put hands on someone.

Fair enough on the civil case though. It just boggles me because rightly or wrongly the jury found him not guilty which to me sounds like they thought he acted in self defence....... Very strange she could win a payout from someone who acted in self defence. Obviously a massive difference between the legal and civil worlds.

Either way though, that's not to say she didn't deserve it or anything just thoughts on the case.
I'm not sure that the jury actually accepted Micevic acted in self defence? Can't rightly see how they could have if every witness said Hookes didn't lay a hand on him? The finding was pretty surprising at the time and perhaps even more so now knowing a few more of the facts.
 
Reactions: Super_Fly_Sam

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
I saw a few days of this trial.

If I recall right, there was some evidence given that after the cricketers were ejected, they gradually made their way toward the corner of the pub where there was a dude working the taxis. There was some sort interaction between them there, can't remember if it was physical or verbal, which resulted in the bouncers heading there to move them on and then they all ended up further down the road where the final blow happened.

The vast majority of the cricketing group were either saying they were angels and didn't swear one bit (Sean Graf was the most unbelievable) or couldn't remember hearing or seeing any of the cricketing group do any wrong (pretty much Lehmann's answer to everythingl). Wayne Phillips sounded the most believable out of the group, with him acknowledging that the cricketers were swearing abuse, resisting removal and part of a jostling scrum. It's just really unfortunate Hookes lost his life after an incident that could've been avoided.

Micevic's barrister, Terry Forrest, was very good. Went on to become a Supreme Court Judge.

Micevic during his evidence stood and showed the position he was in when he threw the punch. He said Hookes threw a couple to the body and grabbed hold of him pushing him downward. As Micevic was almost bent over he threw a somewhat looping hook over his head which connected. As the accused, he didn't have to give any evidence but he did and he came across as very genuine in his answers.

As for the civil action, I'd say it would have been settled by the security firm's insurer given all the evidence by the firm during Micevic's trial was that he acted in accordance with his duties in the pub and on the street that night.
I didn't think for a second the cricketers would have been behaving in any kind of exemplary manner. For a start, from memory Victoria had just pulled off one of their Houdini like come from behind wins, not unusal during the Hookes' reign. So they would have been in serious celebratory mode.
 
Nov 14, 2015
9,613
9,782
I didn't think for a second the cricketers would have been behaving in any kind of exemplary manner. For a start, from memory Victoria had just pulled off one of their Houdini like come from behind wins, not unusal during the Hookes' reign. So they would have been in serious celebratory mode.
For sure. But they should've said "yeah we were swearing back at them and there was some push and shove but the attack on David was unprovoked". Instead they were saying they did nothing at all wrong, when there was evidence that they did fuck up at various points. It made their evidence less credible, so when they all say that Hookes never threw a punch, are they telling the truth or trying to cover his arse and theirs?

It all came down to reasonable doubt. The jury had to consider equally valid evidence supporting conflicting versions. In order to arrive at a verdict of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the jury needed to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis. And they couldn't do that.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
For sure. But they should've said "yeah we were swearing back at them and there was some push and shove but the attack on David was unprovoked". Instead they were saying they did nothing at all wrong, when there was evidence that they did fuck up at various points. It made their evidence less credible, so when they all say that Hookes never threw a punch, are they telling the truth or trying to cover his arse and theirs?

It all came down to reasonable doubt. The jury had to consider equally valid evidence supporting conflicting versions. In order to arrive at a verdict of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the jury needed to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis. And they couldn't do that.
Reasonable doubt is all a defence ever has to put in the minds of 1 or 2 out of 12 strangers required to agree to get a guilty verdict.

It did surprise me to hear Bezzina say though, that the approximately 30 witnesses, consisting of a cricketers, other patrons, neighbours and I think other bouncers as well, all said Hookes didn't punch or grab Micevic.

If a few had of leaned either way on that it may have cast doubts in my own mind. But 30 out of 30?
 
Reactions: Super_Fly_Sam
Nov 14, 2015
9,613
9,782
Reasonable doubt is all a defence ever has to put in the minds of 1 or 2 out of 12 strangers required to agree to get a guilty verdict.

It did surprise me to hear Bezzina say though, that the approximately 30 witnesses consisting of a cricketers, other patrons neighbours and I think others bouncers too, all said Hookes didn't grab or punch Micevic.

If a few had of leaned either way it may have cast doubts in my mind. But 30 out of 30?
But of those 30, how many were looking at Hookes and Micevic at the time of the blow? It was a fracas in the middle of the street with distractions all over. Even though the neighbours claimed to have seen the blow, they weren't good witnesses. One was pissed and said he avoided all forms of media straight after because he didn't want to be influenced, the other was out there trying to get as much media attention as possible. Where there was a large group pushing and shoving in close quarters, a couple of quick, low punches could easily go missed.
 
Reactions: Super_Fly_Sam

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
18,137
4,841
But of those 30, how many were looking at Hookes and Micevic at the time of the blow? It was a fracas in the middle of the street with distractions all over. Even though the neighbours claimed to have seen the blow, they weren't good witnesses. One was pissed and said he avoided all forms of media straight after because he didn't want to be influenced, the other was out there trying to get as much media attention as possible. Where there was a large group pushing and shoving in close quarters, a couple of quick, low punches could easily go missed.
I haven't heard a reliable description of how the overall scene looked. Had assumed as the Hookes-Micevic incident happened so far from the hotel it was the focus of other's attention rather than one of many incidents taking place at the time.