Stephen Dank: ‘Sports scientist’ gave banned peptides to Cronulla Sharks players that may have accelerated Jon Mannah’s death from cancer

THE Daily Telegraph has succeeded in doing what anti-doping bodies failed — to prove in court that Stephen Dank’s actions may have accelerated the Cronulla Sharks player’s death from cancer.

• DANK DEEMED ‘RECKLESS’ OVER MANNAH
• PAUL KENT: MEDIA WAS RIGHT TO REPORT IT

THE Daily Telegraph has succeeded in doing what law enforcement and anti-doping bodies around the world failed — namely to prove in court that so-called “sports scientist” Stephen Dank administered banned peptides to Cronulla Sharks players that may have accelerated Jon Mannah’s death from cancer.

The Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and the World Anti-Doping Authority all failed to prove his involvement.

But this week Nationwide News, a subsidiary of News Corp Australia, publisher of The Daily Telegraph, won almost all aspects of a defamation case brought by Mr Dank following a series of articles about him published in both The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph.

Sports scientist Stephen Dank / Picture: Michael Klein

On Monday a civil jury of three men and one woman in the NSW Supreme Court found Mr Dank had acted with “reckless indifference” to the life of Mr Mannah, the Sharks player who died in January, 2013, after a relapse of Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

In April, 2013, journalists Rebecca Wilson, Josh Massoud and James Hooper published an article in The Daily Telegraph questioning if there was a link between Mr Dank’s peptide program at the Sharks, involving substances banned by WADA, and Mr Mannah’s fatal relapse.

The jury rejected claims of defamation by Mr Dank, who is not a qualified doctor, ruling the article’s imputation that he “accelerated Mr Mannah’s death from cancer” due to the peptides was “substantially true”.

The same verdict of truth was given to the imputations that “Dank acted with reckless indifference to Mannah’s life by administering dangerous peptides to Mannah while he was in the remissions stage of cancer”.

It was also found to be “substantially true” that “Dank administered dangerous and cancer-causing supplements to Jon Mannah and other players, thereby exposing them to risk”.

Another article, written by Sunday Telegraph journalist Yoni Bashan, was found to not convey defamatory meanings alleged by Mr Dank.

NRL player John Mannah.

Yesterday, the jury found in favour of Mr Dank on just one element of his case, ruling an allegation he had injected players with the blood-thinning medicine Warfarin could not be defended on the grounds of contextual truth.

Mr Dank has been ordered to pay News’ costs in relation to two of the articles.

Tom Blackburn SC, counsel for Nationwide News, said Mr Dank should receive only nominal damages, as the jury found his program had done “much, much worse” to the players “than the administration of Warfarin”.

Justice Lucy McCallum is expected to decide on the damages amount this week.

THE JURY’S FINDINGS

Have the defendants (Nationwide News) established that the following are substantially true?

Stephen Dank administered to football players peptide drugs (CJC-1295 and GHRP-6) which were prohibited by the World Anti-Doping Authority.YES

He acted with reckless indifference to (Sharks player Jon) Mannah’s life by administering dangerous peptides to Mannah whilst Mannah was in the remissions stage of cancer. YES

By administering peptides to Jon Mannah he accelerated Mannah’s death from cancer.YES

He administered dangerous and cancer causing supplements to Jon Mannah and other football players, thereby exposing them to riskYES

His conduct in administering peptide substances to football players was absolutely indefensible and justified one of Australia’s leading sports physicians to express his horrorYES