What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
59,158
Why do I get the feeling the charges will be thrown out..

Stewart was dumb though

It usually takes DNA evidence, a f*ckload of witnesses or a guilty accused for sexual offences to get up.

Mind you, Stewart's "I don't remember" is never a good look when it goes before a jury.

Based on (the practically nothing) what I've heard of this matter, it will struggle something hardcore at the committal stage. Still, the process is likely to drag on for ages.
 

KeepingTheFaith

Referee
Messages
25,235
http://www.smh.com.au/leaguehq/articles/2009/04/07/1238869947853.html

Brett Stewart will plead not guilty to raping his teenage neighbour, a court heard today.

Stewart faces charges of sexual intercourse without consent and aggravated assault with an act of indecency.

His lawyer, Ian Byrne, told Manly Local Court today his client would plead not guilty to both charges.

The alleged victim, aged 17, claimed she had been smoking a cigarette outside her home about 8pm on March 6 when Stewart, 24, assaulted her.

The Sea Eagles fullback, who was to have been one of the faces of the NRL's advertising campaign this year, had been celebrating Manly's season launch at the Wharf Bar before the alleged attack.

Stewart is accused of having sexual intercourse with the girl without her consent, knowing she did not consent, and performing an act of indecency that involved forcing his tongue into her mouth, according to court documents.

The alleged victim was taken to Royal North Shore Hospital after neighbours called police, and Stewart was questioned by detectives and released without charge while DNA samples were collected.

He was charged with sexual assault four days later, before the DNA results were returned.

In addition, an AVO was taken out against him, which prevented him from returning to his apartment because of its proximity to the victim's.

Magistrate Margaret Quinn adjourned the matter to May 26 at Downing Centre Local Court.

She also extended the AVO for three months to July 7.

The NRL, which had to modify its advertising campaign at a cost of $1 million, fined Manly $100,000 over its boozy season opening and suspended Stewart for four games for drunken behaviour.

Stewart returns to the team this weekend to play against the Wests Tigers at Brookvale Oval.

Stewart wore a black suit and strode silently into a waiting car after leaving court, where he had not been required to speak. He declined to comment on the charges or his thoughts about this weekend's game.

The Sea Eagles have yet to win a match this season.

He is not a saviour: Hasler

Manly coach Des Hasler says Stewartis not the saviour for the winless NRL premiers as the star fullback prepares to play his first game of the 2009 season.

"He is not the saviour, there are 16 other players partaking in the game as well,'' said Hasler.

"We cannot excuse what we have done. We know what we have to do. We will turn it around.

"He is a fairly influential player, he was the top try scorer last year.

"He's one of the best fullbacks in the world, he's going to be a real advantage for us coming back.''

Hasler says there are several injury concerns ahead of Sunday's game with centres Steve Matai (shoulder) and Jamie Lyon (knee) in doubt as well as Michael Robertson and skipper Matt Orford both carrying niggling injuries.

Hasler will give all of his players until the end of the week to prove their fitness for the game
 

Didgi

Moderator
Messages
17,260
No-one had mentioned rape before, it was just sexual assault, which does not necesssarily mean rape. Confusing.:?
 

Evenflow

Bench
Messages
3,139
No-one had mentioned rape before, it was just sexual assault, which does not necesssarily mean rape. Confusing.:?

While i'm no expert i think sexual assault can mean many different things, including rape. I dare say nobody mentioned it earlier because the exact nature of charges and alleged happenings of that night weren't made fully transparent until he faced court today.
 

Didgi

Moderator
Messages
17,260
While i'm no expert i think sexual assault can mean many different things, including rape. I dare say nobody mentioned it earlier because the exact nature of charges and alleged happenings of that night weren't made fully transparent until he faced court today.

So are you saying the police prosecutors kept somethings away from the media attention until the courtcase? Makes sense at least :lol:.
 

redvscotty

First Grade
Messages
8,003
Indecency is the charge, it simply then goes on to say what type on indecency. Is this for real, do people not read?
 

Simo

First Grade
Messages
6,702
wow, so he actually was charged with rape. All the conflicting stories lead me to believe it was a bit of a grope rather than actual rape. This is much more serious than I thought it was.

If so, how does the DNA come back inconclusive? Can you forcebly have sex with someone and leave no DNA? (this wasnt premeditated like a scene from Dexter, it was an alleged crime of opportunity).
 

brook

First Grade
Messages
5,065
wow, so he actually was charged with rape. All the conflicting stories lead me to believe it was a bit of a grope rather than actual rape. This is much more serious than I thought it was.

If so, how does the DNA come back inconclusive? Can you forcebly have sex with someone and leave no DNA? (this wasnt premeditated like a scene from Dexter, it was an alleged crime of opportunity).

way back when he was first charged someone posted the legal definition of 'sexual intercourse' in nsw law. It pretty much covers any type of penetration (including digital penetration or using objects) so the lack of DNA evidence probably doesn't say much either way.
 

Simo

First Grade
Messages
6,702
way back when he was first charged someone posted the legal definition of 'sexual intercourse' in nsw law. It pretty much covers any type of penetration (including digital penetration or using objects) so the lack of DNA evidence probably doesn't say much either way.

oh ok, thanks, I need to brush up on the birds and bees as it seems sexual intercourse by law is the same as 'warm apple pie' so to speak.
 

Didgi

Moderator
Messages
17,260
Isn't there normally physical evidence such as bruising on the legs and penis? There has been nothing reported about that as far as I can tell.
 
Messages
2,016
Correct. The legal definition in the Crimes Act of sexual intercourse includes penetration of the vagina or anus with body parts or objects, and insertion of the penis into the mouth. Also includes cunnilingus.

His tongue in her mouth does not = sexual intercourse, but must equal indecency (which I couldn't be bothered looking up the definition of).

So, my guess is that the allegation is he's grabbed her, tried to pash her, and gone the grope on her crotch and finger/s have gone in.
 

Latest posts

Top