Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[Noa]

Good on Manly for not bowing to public pressure. Standing him down achieves nothing. If he's convicted, he will get his punishment.

This I agree with. Innocent until proven gulity means nothing if your going to be selective when you use it.

 

[bulldog]

I think it`s a good decision to let him keep playing. I feel sorry for him if he indeed did something illegal to that girl, and I`ll be very upset if he is convicted. I must admit I don`t feel any concern for the girl, maybe cos I know nothing about her. If she were someone I know, I`d probably feel differently.

WTF? You'll feel sorry for him if he is guilty? If he's guilty I say f*ck him, throw him to the wolves. The only sympathy I will have if he's found guilty is for the fans who will cop sh*t for years to come because an employee of the club they support is a scumbag.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

I don`t think he`s a scumbag, even if he`s guilty.

 

[Pass the Ball]

I don`t think he`s a scumbag, even if he`s guilty.

I guess people have differing definitions of scumbag - sure...

 

[Joker's Wild]

I don`t think he`s a scumbag, even if he`s guilty.

If it was your 17yo daughter/sister etc Im sure you would feel differently

Just because you dont know her is no excuse for such lack of empathy

 

[Kiki]

Another viewpoint is the Manly should be congratulated and applauded for displaying the fortitude to stand by their player, when told by him that he is innocent.

It displays strength of purpose and a commendable fierce loyalty.

yep this is true. i dont really have a problem with him playing.

someone very close to me has been the source of a police investigation for years (not sexual assault thank god) and trust me, the cops can get it wrong sometimes.

(not saying they have with Brett Stewart, but i don't begrudge Manly wanting to support him despite the charge)

 

[Sleep]

From what I've read today Manly are running with the innocent until proven guilty angle. I can understand that given if it does come out he's in the clear after being stood down he would of missed alot of footy he could of rightfully played.

 

[brook]

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.

Thensw rape crisus centre says there is http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/Information Sheets/Understanding-sexual-violence.htm

so do these guys http://www.aussielegal.com.au/informationoutline~nocache~1~SubTopicDetailsID~961.htm

 

[TimmyB]

So does the crimes act. It's pretty explicit as to what constitutes a sexual assault - hint: does not include an "arse grab".

 

[Timmah]

Wow what a shocking article by Josh Massoud.. he makes the Bulldogs supporters looks like a bunch of moronic hypocritical animals.

From what I have gathered in these forums, Dogs supporters are quite compassionate with this issue knowing what it feels like, especially considering he has not been found guilty, nor were any of the dogs supporters..

Are the fans at 'the kennel' really of this hypocritical mindframe???

No, hence why it appears that article has been withdrawn from the Telegraph website (even though it still got to print in today's Tele). There was one quote from one forum poster there, and the rest of the quotes were people suggesting it's a bad idea and to rise above. The article was one of the worst pieces of journalism I've seen in a long time - a blatant attempt to put sh*t on the 'Dogs when it's got SFA to do with them.

 

[Eels Dude]

I think it`s a good decision to let him keep playing. I feel sorry for him if he indeed did something illegal to that girl, and I`ll be very upset if he is convicted. I must admit I don`t feel any concern for the girl, maybe cos I know nothing about her. If she were someone I know, I`d probably feel differently.

You feel sorry for HIM if he's found guilty? Yet you've no concern for the victim whatsoever?

Does that mean if one of your family members wandered down to the shops and shot 5 strangers to death you wouldn't give a toss as long as they were found not guilty?

 

[sneagle]

So does the crimes act. It's pretty explicit as to what constitutes a sexual assault - hint: does not include an "arse grab".

My goodness - it just goes from bad to worse as far as the crime speculation - I hadn't heard this in any other reporting:
From Fox Sports http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,,25169627-23209,00.html
This is the excerpt I couldn't believe......
"Stewart, who is alleged to have digitally penetrated a 17-year-old girl while in a drunken stupor, arrived at Dee Why Police Station in the back of a police car shortly before 6 on Tuesday night. "

When could this have occurred - when her father pulled him off in the stairwell, outside next doors driveway, in their driveway or when the group of shocked onlookers observed him crash tackling her outside her home????????

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

I don`t know what I`d feel in other situations, I just know right now I feel nothing for this girl. But I feel sorry for Stewart because his game has given me great joy and entertainment, and I believe he is a good person who may have made a mistake while not being in control of his actions.

 

[Mr Saab]

I don`t know what I`d feel in other situations, I just know right now I feel nothing for this girl. But I feel sorry for Stewart because his game has given me great joy and entertainment, and I believe he is a good person who may have made a mistake while not being in control of his actions.

No excuse.
Drinking is no excuse at all.....

 

[adamkungl]

My goodness - it just goes from bad to worse as far as the crime speculation - I hadn't heard this in any other reporting:
From Fox Sports http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,,25169627-23209,00.html
This is the excerpt I couldn't believe......
"Stewart, who is alleged to have digitally penetrated a 17-year-old girl while in a drunken stupor, arrived at Dee Why Police Station in the back of a police car shortly before 6 on Tuesday night. "

When could this have occurred - when her father pulled him off in the stairwell, outside next doors driveway, in their driveway or when the group of shocked onlookers observed him crash tackling her outside her home????????

I was wondering what it was he was actually accused of. I guess this is it. How the f**k does someone that drunk even manage to do that? Something about this still makes me think theres more to it. I feel bad constantly trying to find reasons why the alleged victim is lieing, but to me it just seems odd that a bloke completely off his chops has the time and coordination to get through two layers of clothing and commit the act before someone helps her, if indeed she was screaming from the start. With his "I don't remember" defence, as a few people have said, its her word against nobodies, unless a witness can shed more light on the matter. He's up sh*t creek big time.

 

[Eels Dude]

I was wondering what it was he was actually accused of. I guess this is it. How the f**k does someone that drunk even manage to do that? Something about this still makes me think theres more to it. I feel bad constantly trying to find reasons why the alleged victim is lieing, but to me it just seems odd that a bloke completely off his chops has the time and coordination to get through two layers of clothing and commit the act before someone helps her, if indeed she was screaming from the start.

Um... I really don't think it's that complicated to put your hands down someone's pants.

 

[brook]

I was wondering what it was he was actually accused of. I guess this is it. How the f**k does someone that drunk even manage to do that? Something about this still makes me think theres more to it. I feel bad constantly trying to find reasons why the alleged victim is lieing, but to me it just seems odd that a bloke completely off his chops has the time and coordination to get through two layers of clothing and commit the act before someone helps her, if indeed she was screaming from the start. With his "I don't remember" defence, as a few people have said, its her word against nobodies, unless a witness can shed more light on the matter. He's up sh*t creek big time.

Assuming she's wearing a skirt or dress, with a big footballer on top of her (if as alleged he 'tackled' her) I suspect that could take a lot less time than you think, certainly could be done before the nearest person arrived.

I suspected this will be the allegation once they mentioned taking dna from under his fingernails - if that test comes back positive you'd have to say he's in deep trouble.

 

[sneagle]

I was wondering what it was he was actually accused of. I guess this is it. How the f**k does someone that drunk even manage to do that? Something about this still makes me think theres more to it. I feel bad constantly trying to find reasons why the alleged victim is lieing, but to me it just seems odd that a bloke completely off his chops has the time and coordination to get through two layers of clothing and commit the act before someone helps her, if indeed she was screaming from the start. With his "I don't remember" defence, as a few people have said, its her word against nobodies, unless a witness can shed more light on the matter. He's up sh*t creek big time.

When news of this first broke I was stunned and horrified. Then as reports progressed it just wasn't sitting right with me (not saying the allegations aren't true - just not making much sense). The amount of media attention and changes to the details are just making it that much harder to fathom.
Coupled with this trial by media and some even have him convicted already it is becoming a bit too much.
But what Fox Sports alludes to could explain the taking of the scraping under Brett's fingernails and the girls saliva. Although it's quite possible Fox have interpretted a possible "alledged" scenario.

 

[0neye]

Moffoeye said , we can beat the *edit* on Saturday

 

[cupid]

I don't even think the DNA test were used as evidence to charge Stewart, because ABC had reported a night before that they will take 1 week to process.