Only because his victim changed her mind and story because he's not worth shit without an NRL contract.
Therein lies the core issue. If she had of given evidence and he had been convicted it was highly probable his contract his torn up so from her perspective she is between a rock and a hard place as are many woman in similar situations be they married to NRL players or otherwise. There is a belief in some circumstances there should be a case for having a matter determined as not proven as opposed to not guilty because let’s face it plenty of persons charged are found not guilty when if the truth be known they are as guilty as sin.