Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[Tommax25]

Why has he not been stood down ?

Because laffranchi wasnt.






Although I thought he had been stood down already? I guess not then.

 

[SaveTheChildren]

No. Julian is an english drag queen comedian.

Yeah. I know. I was saying i think it was is Clarey

 

[Ray Mosters]

wow thats a bit extreme.

Not for rape its not. I have a close friend who still has nightmares almost 15 years after the event. If that was what was involved in this case, then i would be quite happy for Brett to get out of prison in 12 or 15 years absolutely penniless.

 

[Tommax25]

i sympathise with you on this. the girls and I at Errol have very actively being trying to get more women into league and defending it publicly etc etc....and now this happens and it just breaks my heart.

Tommax i think it's because Lafranchi isn't a big name, or at least he wasn't when he was charged. if i remember correctly the incident with him took place after a night out in Kings Cross so he was probably drunk too.

The inconsistency is what I have a problem with. I cant remember what the forums were like concerning laffranchi, was there 50-page long threads concerning laffranchi being stood down?

Thats what I meant perverse, btw, I know people would have the same view in both situatoins but I dont remember there being such a media/forum circus for laffranchi.

 

[Kiki]

i dont know i dont think i was posting here when it all went down, but i doubt it would have been as big of a deal. but yeh i mean there needs to be some kind of consistency.

 

[S.S.T.I.D]

I can see your point mate, but league has gone through this before, the problem is we continually get reminded of some of the f*ck ups that have gone on.

I feel unpatriotic that I talk about this more, than firing up against you Rabbits for the derby.

I'm sick of hearing about it, yet I still feel like I want to know what the f*ck happened..

And instead of the build up to one of the great rivalries in the game we will get Brett Stewart for the rest of the week. And it's all we'll talk about. There are some great games this weekend, not just ours obviously.

It's just so.....rugby league huh?

 

[adamkungl]

Has he been stood down yet? Still don't think he should be. Some of us still believe in innocent until proven guilty. What if this drags on for the entire season, he isn't allowed to play, and he turns out innocent? Will the "he shouldn't have got himself in this situation in the first place" brigade still be saying that? Is an entire season ban appropriate punishment for a drunken accident? No. It isn't.

As for the actual charge, I must say I'm surprised. Just this morning I got the impression it was getting to be a mountain out of a molehill situation. I wish we knew more what happened than vague reports about him having to be pulled off her. The lack of detail is frustrating. Did he say anything? When he was being pulled off, what was he actually doing? How does someone drunk enough to not remember anything sexually assault someone? Sort of lacks the physical capability I would think.

Finally, as for karma...to be honest I couldn't give a f**k what Manly did in the 70s. Particularly to spastic clubs like Souths, Wests and Parra. Karma for existing.

 

[fatshark]

Not for rape its not. I have a close friend who still has nightmares almost 15 years after the event. If that was what was involved in this case, then i would be quite happy for Brett to get out of prison in 12 or 15 years absolutely penniless

your not the girls father by chance?

 

[Tommax25]

Yes,you keep saying that.
You got your answer,isnt that enough?

What was the answer then? Myself and bartman have had a bit of friendly back and forth on this, and the answer as I understand it from bartman is that we have to wipe the slate clean and come down hard now to stamp it out. I can accept that, as the reasoning is sound and the good intent for the game is there. Whats your take? My take is that people should be treated equally, and that there was no furore when laffranchi and crockket were charged, no calls to stand down, no media circus. Essentially I'm saying it should be manlys call to stand him down (and I am happy enough for them to do that if they want) and not the nrls call like it was in these other almost identical circumstances.

The answer will be enough, although I wouldnt mind someone else seeing my side of it, not necessarily agreeing, but seeing that what I say has some sort of merit because I am a little incredulous that the majority of views in the thread are so overwhelmingly one-sided.

 

[[furrycat]]

wow , there you go. I didnt know that.

Im surprised then that the media were not using 'rape charge' in their headlines then.

Yeah, changed a few years ago where you are not charged with rape in NSW- it all falls under the band of sexual assault

 

[[furrycat]]

And an arse grab can still be considered sexual assault... it is in no way common assault because for it to be common assault (no such thing as "indecent assault") it has to be proven that there was intention to cause physical injury to a person.

 

[Kiki]

Not for rape its not. I have a close friend who still has nightmares almost 15 years after the event. If that was what was involved in this case, then i would be quite happy for Brett to get out of prison in 12 or 15 years absolutely penniless.

this might be me being overly optimistic, but i dont think hes being accused of a violent nightmare inducing attack. i think its far more likely to be a lower grade sexual assault (not saying that isn't traumatic on its own).

and considering sentencing laws in Australia are pretty lax as if he would get that much time anyway.

 

[bartman]

What if this drags on for the entire season, he isn't allowed to play, and he turns out innocent? Will the "he shouldn't have got himself in this situation in the first place" brigade still be saying that?

Yes.

The issue that he shouldn't have gotten himself in this situation is separate to whether he ends up being proven guilty of his charge.

Players need to realise how much damage they do to their clubs and the game through their thoughtless behaviour, and their clubs and the game need to help them understand. It's got nothing to with the verdict.

The lack of detail is frustrating. Did he say anything? When he was being pulled off, what was he actually doing? How does someone drunk enough to not remember anything sexually assault someone? Sort of lacks the physical capability I would think.

No doubt the court case will bring out the answers you seek. But if you think it through you can work out a scenario for what he might be accused of doing after the tackle in order to be charged, given the small clues that have leaked out. It's not for us to speculate here though - on the specifics we should act as if the cat's got our tongue.

 

[Manly Preniers in 2005]

he's been charged, stand him down for the intrim until his hearing, if he pleads not guilty he should be free to play until the law finds him guilty of a crime, same a joel thompson

For probably the first time in the history of the forum Im gonna agree wholly with you raider.

His preliminary hearing we will know what his plea will be, as well as if there is enough evidence in the view of the court. If there is, the case will proceed to the district courts, and therefore take a long period of time, if this is the case another decision must be made by manly.
if the courts decide there is not enough evidence, it will be thrown out imdediately, and the whole ordeal will be officially over. om which case he should be recalled etc.

However, as passionate a Manly fan as I am, and as much as he is without doubt may favourite player now beaver has left, I think until April 7, our club has very little choice but to stand him down, and then re-evaluate following the preliminary hearing.

Personally, Im shattered, this hurts more then the 2007 Grand Final loss.

 

[Willow]

i dont know i dont think i was posting here when it all went down, but i doubt it would have been as big of a deal. but yeh i mean there needs to be some kind of consistency.

Laffranchi was hanged by a few posters here but more were on hand to remind us of innocence before guilt. Moderating didn't stop a certain degree of outrage and moralising. As it turned out, Laffranchi was exonerated. Not surprisingly, those who had him guilty didn't say a word.

Having said that, there seems to be a greater level of outrage in the Stewart case. Watching how the club, NRL and media respond brings out the best and worst in people.

At the end of the day, we have to wait for the legal process to take its course.

 

[Prince Charles]

Tommax i think it's because Lafranchi isn't a big name, or at least he wasn't when he was charged.

Yeah I agree with this. I'm not quite sure I understand the comparisons of Stewart to Laffranchi. Stewart is an Australian rep, premiership winner, a golden boy of our sport and just recently portrayed as the face of the game. To hear that some people are surprised that Stewart attracts greater media coverage in comparison is quite surprising in itself.

It's a heartbreaking situation for any fan of the game. I feel for Manly supporters through all this and I guess we can only hope that the truthful and fair outcome is reached.

 

[Kiki]

heartbreaking is the right word for it.

 

[bartman]

What was the answer then? Myself and bartman have had a bit of friendly back and forth on this, and the answer as I understand it from bartman is that we have to wipe the slate clean and come down hard now to stamp it out. I can accept that, as the reasoning is sound and the good intent for the game is there. Whats your take? My take is that people should be treated equally, and that there was no furore when laffranchi and crockket were charged, no calls to stand down, no media circus. Essentially I'm saying it should be manlys call to stand him down (and I am happy enough for them to do that if they want) and not the nrls call like it was in these other almost identical circumstances.

The answer will be enough, although I wouldnt mind someone else seeing my side of it, not necessarily agreeing, but seeing that what I say has some sort of merit because I am a little incredulous that the majority of views in the thread are so overwhelmingly one-sided.

I see what you and others that look at Lafranchi playing on while charged are getting at Tommax (I think). I'm sure that many within the Manly club itself feel the same way at the moment, and are asking the same questions.

One other precedent mentioned in here is that of Dane Tilse... who was sacked by his club and de-registered by the league if I recall, perhaps without even being charged (though I could be wrong on that)?

I just think that situations of recent years with charged players continuing to play matches was damaging for the game, and the league didn't show the spine (or perhaps have the reasons) at the time to pressure the clubs involved to take the action that Manly will soon be taking - by free will or NRL pressure.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

His preliminary hearing we will know what his plea will be, as well as if there is enough evidence in the view of the court.

According to reports he has already stated to the police he denies the allegations made by the alleged victim, so in that respect I dont see the reason for him to stand down until then.

Im not sure the unbolded part of your post warrants him standing down until that point in time either.

 

[coolumsharkie]

He's goooooooorne.

Just accept it boys and girls.