Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[El Diablo]

starting to unravel now gong!

:lol:

they didn't need DNA to charge him so this is obviously not seen as something very important

 

[MANLYMAGIC08]

hahah not very important... dna tests?

It'd be pretty important if he had some of the 17 year olds you know what under his fingernails, no?

 

[TooheysNew]

hahah not very important... dna tests?

It'd be pretty important if he had some of the 17 year olds you know what under his fingernails, no?

Girl germs?

 

[Eels Dude]

hahah not very important... dna tests?

It'd be pretty important if he had some of the 17 year olds you know what under his fingernails, no?

Not if he was tested hours, or a day later.

 

[Patorick]

Surely DNA Test results are a myth...

Right Ronny?

 

[El Diablo]

hahah not very important... dna tests?

It'd be pretty important if he had some of the 17 year olds you know what under his fingernails, no?

if it was crucial then they should have waited

so it's not important or the cops have gone off half cocked

i hope its the latter, but http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25176698-2722,00.html

“We believe we have enough physical evidence and eyewitness reports to proceed with the case against Mr Stewart,” a senior police source told The Australian.

time will tell

 

[El Diablo]

Girl germs?

ewwwwwwwwwww

 

[sneagle]

Police to pursue case despite Brett Stewart returning negative DNA samples


Brent Read, Peter Kogoy | March 12, 2009

Article from: The Australian
THE police case against NRL star Brett Stewart on sexual assault charges appears to have weakened.
Results of the DNA swabs taken from Stewart were returned to police earlier today.
They returned negative but police sources says they will continue to press ahead with the case.
It is alleged Stewart sexually assaulted a 17-year-old girl early last Friday evening.
Stewart had been drinking heavily that afternnon with team-mates at Manly's Wharf Hotel. The NRL premiers launched their season at the hotel.
“We believe we have enough physical evidence and eyewitness reports to proceed with the case against Mr Stewart,” a senior police source told The Australian.

The former Test fullback has been stood down by the NRL for bringing the game into disrepute, although chief executive David Gallop made it clear the decision had nothing to do with the sexual assault allegations.

Rather, Gallop said Stewart had been sanctioned for his drinking at the season launch prior to the incident. Stewart was allegedly so dunk he was refused service.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25176698-2722,00.html

 

[MANLYMAGIC08]

Kinda Coby.. I'll tell you when you're a bit older.

 

[MANLYMAGIC08]

Not if he was tested hours, or a day later.

Lol, why would you bother a day later..
pretty sure it occurred when he was initially taken into the police station

 

[TooheysNew]

Kinda Coby.. I'll tell you when you're a bit older.

lol. You're the one hiding from using real words.

 

[MANLYMAGIC08]

nah mate, couldn't be bothered listing all the things dna samples test for

 

[t1tan]

Lol, why would you bother a day later..
pretty sure it occurred when he was initially taken into the police station

You have proof of this?

 

[HevyDevy]

starting to unravel now gong!

Only Manly fans want the case to unravel.

The rest of us hope that it is fully investigated and that he is found innocent.

It doesn't help anyone if he gets off on a 'technicality' or because someone f**ks up.

 

[herbert henry1908]

the reports of witnesses is interesting.

without DNA wouldnt they need a direct witness to the alleged sexual assault ( rather than just the alleged scuffle afterwards) to prove the charge?

I would have thought proving penetration would be essential to any sexual assault charge.

 

[HevyDevy]

the reports of witnesses is interesting.

without DNA wouldnt they need a direct witness to the alleged sexual assault ( rather than just the alleged scuffle afterwards) to prove the charge?

I would have thought proving penetration would be essential to any sexual assault charge.

It doesn't need to go that far to be sexual assault HH.

If he grabbed her tit it's sexual assault (although I would hate to see someone's career ended for that).

 

[Eels Dude]

Lol, why would you bother a day later..
pretty sure it occurred when he was initially taken into the police station

Because that's how it works. From indications the girl in question did not attend the police station on the night but spoke to police at the scene before going in to make a formal statement the following evening. She would not have been DNA tested until then. Similarly, Brett Stewart would not have been arrested by police until hours after the alledged attack and may have not provided a DNA testing that night either, especially he deferred making a statement.

You would bother a day later because it makes sense legally and even though chances are any DNA remains would be gone, there is still the slight chance that they would remain and tests would be taken out regardless.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Only Manly fans want the case to unravel.

The rest of us hope that it is fully investigated and that he is found innocent.

It doesn't help anyone if he gets off on a 'technicality' or because someone f**ks up.

If the case unravels there isnt the evidence to support the charge. Hardly a technicality.

 

[RainMan]

the reports of witnesses is interesting.

It looks as if it could end up a 'he says - she says' type thing. I thought the only 'witnesses' were the father and mother, oh and little sister...

 

[herbert henry1908]

It doesn't need to go that far to be sexual assault HH.

If he grabbed her tit it's sexual assault (although I would hate to see someone's career ended for that).

Not sure thats right.

there was a discussion about this yesterday and sexual assault in NSW requires penetration.

Bartman posted the info from the correct legal website.