Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[cupid]

the facts :lol:

the facts you lot want to hear

Gee, sorry Pheonix Wright

 

[Talons]

http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/sport/story/stewart-media-deals/
SEA Eagles fullback Brett Stewart is weighing up his media options for his first interview following his sexual assault trial.
The Manly flyer has spent the past week in the Downing Centre Court. A verdict is expected on Tuesday.
A day has not gone by without his manager, Manly-based George Mimis, standing by his client’s side.
Along with Stewart’s entire immediate family, including brother Glenn and partner Jaime Baker, the former Australian fullback has been strongly supported in court.
Among the Sea Eagles to support their mate in court have been Anthony Watmough, Michael Robertson, David Williams, Des Hasler, Jason King, Don Singe, Peter Peters, and Andre Rickenbach.
The past 18 months have not only taken an emotional toll on Stewart, but financially draining with a mounting legal bill.
A long line of media outlets have all pitched in for Stewart’s first interview, but we hear a combined deal will be struck between a magazine and a leading media outlet.

 

[Eels Dude]

http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/sport/story/stewart-media-deals/
SEA Eagles fullback Brett Stewart is weighing up his media options for his first interview following his sexual assault trial.
The Manly flyer has spent the past week in the Downing Centre Court. A verdict is expected on Tuesday.
A day has not gone by without his manager, Manly-based George Mimis, standing by his client’s side.
Along with Stewart’s entire immediate family, including brother Glenn and partner Jaime Baker, the former Australian fullback has been strongly supported in court.
Among the Sea Eagles to support their mate in court have been Anthony Watmough, Michael Robertson, David Williams, Des Hasler, Jason King, Don Singe, Peter Peters, and Andre Rickenbach.
The past 18 months have not only taken an emotional toll on Stewart, but financially draining with a mounting legal bill.
A long line of media outlets have all pitched in for Stewart’s first interview, but we hear a combined deal will be struck between a magazine and a leading media outlet.

It's a bit rich people trying to profit from this. How about the alledged victim does a media deal too, then we can have the full story from both sides and make up our own minds rather than just hear Stewart's sob story.

 

[Timmah]

http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/sport/story/stewart-media-deals/
SEA Eagles fullback Brett Stewart is weighing up his media options for his first interview following his sexual assault trial.
The Manly flyer has spent the past week in the Downing Centre Court. A verdict is expected on Tuesday.
A day has not gone by without his manager, Manly-based George Mimis, standing by his client’s side.
Along with Stewart’s entire immediate family, including brother Glenn and partner Jaime Baker, the former Australian fullback has been strongly supported in court.
Among the Sea Eagles to support their mate in court have been Anthony Watmough, Michael Robertson, David Williams, Des Hasler, Jason King, Don Singe, Peter Peters, and Andre Rickenbach.
The past 18 months have not only taken an emotional toll on Stewart, but financially draining with a mounting legal bill.
A long line of media outlets have all pitched in for Stewart’s first interview, but we hear a combined deal will be struck between a magazine and a leading media outlet.

I believe this was posted last night and there was an indepth discussion on it.

 

[clipser]

How long left of this trial? its been 1 week? will this go for the entire 3 weeks or?

 

[El Diablo]

i thought i read something about an expected decision/verdict on Tuesday

 

[Eagle_Rocker]

It's a bit rich people trying to profit from this. How about the alledged victim does a media deal too, then we can have the full story from both sides and make up our own minds rather than just hear Stewart's sob story.

Yeah, good let her tell her story and show her face. So far details about her and her face have been hidden because of her age at the time. It's a high profile he said she said story, yet he is the only one who has copped the wrath of the media and the ignorant public.

 

[Timmah]

Ignorant?

You're assuming he's innocent of the charges, which the jury is still out on.

 

[Eels Dude]

Yeah, good let her tell her story and show her face. So far details about her and her face have been hidden because of her age at the time. It's a high profile he said she said story, yet he is the only one who has copped the wrath of the media and the ignorant public.

It's got nothing to do with her age. Victims or alleged victims of sexual assault's names and face are always supressed as that is the law. Of course he's the one copping the wrath, he's the one on trial here.

 

[El Diablo]

not according to Manly fans

 

[RugbyHighlights]

It's got nothing to do with her age. Victims or alleged victims of sexual assault's names and face are always supressed as that is the law. Of course he's the one copping the wrath, he's the one on trial here.

And what about people put on trial for rape, and found innocent. Ever stopped to think about them?

People accused of rape should also be given privacy, UNTIL they're proved guilty.

Being on trial means sh*t. Absolutely nothing. In Democratic nations you're innocent till proven guilty.

 

[Eels Dude]

And what about people put on trial for rape, and found innocent. Ever stopped to think about them?

People accused of rape should also be given privacy, UNTIL they're proved guilty.

Being on trial means sh*t. Absolutely nothing. In Democratic nations you're innocent till proven guilty.

Most are. The difference in this case is that Brett Stewart has a very high profile so his identity was never going to be able to be concealed was it?

And no-one is found "innocent". Most sexual assault allegations end up going nowhere simply because the burden of proof is too high and he said/ she said cases will always end up with a not guilty verdict, that's if charges are even laid at all. It's fair and democratic, but it also means a lot of rapists walk free.

 

[El Diablo]

And what about people put on trial for rape, and found innocent. Ever stopped to think about them?

People accused of rape should also be given privacy, UNTIL they're proved guilty.

Being on trial means sh*t. Absolutely nothing. In Democratic nations you're innocent till proven guilty.

only happens in Victoriania http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/afl-star-sued-for-sex-assault/story-e6freuy9-1111117085631

 

[RugbyHighlights]

Most are. The difference in this case is that Brett Stewart has a very high profile so his identity was never going to be able to be concealed was it?

And no-one is found "innocent". Most sexual assault allegations end up going nowhere simply because the burden of proof is too high and he said/ she said cases will always end up with a not guilty verdict, that's if charges are even laid at all. It's fair and democratic, but it also means a lot of rapists walk free.

The burden of proof is too high :lol:

What world are you living in mate? If anything the burden of proof is far too low.

You can be charged guilty with nothing but a few false statements. It happens all the time.

If something cannot be documented and proved beyond questioning it should be thrown out. If that means a lot of rapists walk free then so be it. That's the price of living in a Democratic nation.

 

[Eels Dude]

The burden of proof is too high :lol:

What world are you living in mate? If anything the burden of proof is far too low.

You can be charged guilty with nothing but a few false statements. It happens all the time.

If something cannot be documented and proved beyond questioning it should be thrown out. If that means a lot of rapists walk free then so be it. That's the price of living in a Democratic nation.

You're kidding. Beyond reasonable doubt is pretty damn high, and in the case of sexual assault allegations 'beyond reasonable doubt' is extremely difficult to prove because there just isn't enough evidence. In most cases it's one persons word against the others so using your logic a rapist can walk free based on them giving a false statement. With beyond reasonable doubt it's more likely that happening then being convicted simply based on the victims statement.

 

[Talons]

You're kidding. Beyond reasonable doubt is pretty damn high, and in the case of sexual assault allegations 'beyond reasonable doubt' is extremely difficult to prove because there just isn't enough evidence. In most cases it's one persons word against the others so using your logic a rapist can walk free based on them giving a false statement. With beyond reasonable doubt it's more likely that happening then being convicted simply based on the victims statement.

Would it be fair to state that in a large proportion of guilty verdicts relating to sexual assualt that DNA samples are one of the primary indicators of supposed impropriety ?
Of which none were found I might add!
I can understand the whole "he said she said" argument, but psychical evidence must surely carry some weight when rendering a final decision.

 

[El Diablo]

Would it be fair to state that in a large proportion of guilty verdicts relating to sexual assualt that DNA samples are one of the primary indicators of supposed impropriety ?
Of which none were found I might add!
I can understand the whole "he said she said" argument, but psychical evidence must surely carry some weight when rendering a final decision.

you have something that backs this up?

 

[Michaelson]

Physical evidence doesn't always circumnavigate the he said/she said stuff because the the question of consent still remains.

 

[Pete Cash]

Indeed.

If there is DNA evidence the guy has to just claim that he gained consent. The idea that most people have of sexual assault is some monstrous evil pervert raping a 16 year old virgin on her way home from church. That is just the ideal case to prosecute. The vast majority of sexual assaults are between people who know each other. I really don't know what Rugbyhighlights is going on about. The burden of proof for criminal matters is as strict as its possible to be. Someone charged with a crime is innocent until prove guilty and that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

What would be better....prove beyond an unreasonable doubt :lol: it was not me it was my TWIN BROTHER !!!!!!!

hmmm that is an unreasonable doubt. NOT GUILTY.

 

[Pete Cash]

Also physical evidence can be destroyed easily enough. Especially in this case. A shower and a drink would destroy most of the physical evidence in this particular case if Stewart didn't leave hair or skin cells on her clothes (which could be easily enough explained away). A person who is the victim of a sexual assault should not shower, wash any part of the body, change clothes or potentially have a drink before a forensic medical examination is conducted.

Which is a pretty unpleasant ordeal in itself.