I've just been reading about that on another forum In this instance, I'm inclined to believe the AFL players, ie. that she didn't take the photos and they were taken on a holiday in Miami last year. I can't help but question, though, why anyone would want to have photos like that taken of themselves? Particularly people in the public eye as footballers are. I know, I know, it was meant to be private mucking about, but really - these are grown men we're talking about! Why would you put yourself in that position?
If you've seen the Dal Santo photo it doesn't really fit with the just mucking about or just got out of the shower excuse that Reiwoldt has used. As I understand it she claims she took the photos, but they claim they took them themselves. So it begs the question; why are players taking photos of each other naked?
Who knows what the real story is. If it is as she claims and that the AFL and St Kilda tried to sweep the original scandal under the carpet, push her aside and not take any responsibility for it, then I guess she has reason to be poured off. Does it justify her posting these photos on the net? I'd say no. Especially considering Reiwoldt has nothing to do with her (from what I can tell).
Our condolences go our to the Rioli family after the sudden passing of Maurice Rioli.
Was too young to see him play "live", but of the games I have seen his highlights, and his bio, was a brilliant, magical player for Richmond.
What texts, AV? This story is so confusing, there seems to be cover up and fabrication going on left, right and centre so it's hard to know what to believe. But I don't think this is a case of underage sex, if she was in fact pregnant (which I think she must have been at some stage), she was not underage, she would have been sixteen at the time which is legal. Very confusing story nevertheless, no matter which way you look at it.