The AFL has declared itself “incredibly relaxed” over its own investigation into former Carlton president Luke Sayers and the notorious dick pic saga, which is set to continue in the Supreme Court.
Court Ruling on Defamation Case
Sayers has failed in his attempt to have the defamation case heard privately in the Family Court. Instead, the matter will be decided by a judge alone, without a jury, in the Victorian Supreme Court.
Cate Sayers also saw her request for a jury trial rejected. She had sought a jury to hear allegations that her estranged husband, Luke, and a Carlton board member defamed her.
Background to the Scandal
Luke Sayers stepped down from the Carlton presidency at the start of 2025 following an AFL investigation into the lewd photo scandal. The league has faced persistent questions about its probe, which reportedly 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’ Allegations
Cate Sayers claims her husband defamed her in a statutory 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.
Potential Subpoenas
Cleary noted that Luke Sayers’ former adviser and crisis manager Sharon McCrohan, who now works at the AFL, could 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 Decision
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.”
Justice Watson also highlighted that an important function of defamation proceedings is giving defendants the chance to vindicate their reputations. “The Family Court has strict provisions restricting publication regarding the course of proceedings in that court,” he said. “I accept Cate’s submission that those provisions sit at odds with the vindication function that a defamation trial would ordinarily serve.”
