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

caspersparks

Juniors
Messages
424
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.


im not sure about the fingers, didnt they get dna scrapings from his fingers?, im sure if he slipped them in, there'd be some dna on that...

if its just him giving her a french kiss, whats the punishment for that?

i hope bec wilson can enlighten us...
 

Tommax25

Bench
Messages
2,959
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).

I dont know but I feel it might be a case of rape being a better headline than grope. It was never rape before so I'm confused as to how its suddenly become that now, unless digital penetration is classed as rape.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
It is.

Well it is sexual assault anyway. I suppose it depends if you define rape and sexual assault as the same thing.

That definition of sexual assault has existed for a long time as well.
 

Tommax25

Bench
Messages
2,959
It is.

Well it is sexual assault anyway. I suppose it depends if you define rape and sexual assault as the same thing.

That definition of sexual assault has existed for a long time as well.

Well I think rape is forcing yourself on someone involving penetration of the anus/vagina*. Anything else is on another spectrum imo, whether its sexual assualt/indecent assualt, whatever. So kissing someone, using tongue, groping them (without penetration, so feeling up their legs or whatever) would be sexual/indecent assualt.

*There is another one I have heard, the digital penetration one which can include sticking your fingers in someones mouth. I might be missing something here but surely that is not on the sexual assualt scale anywhere? I mean, it is, but why?
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqnews/...ond-altercation/2009/04/09/1239222989057.html

Manly star accused of second altercation

Jacquelin Magnay | April 10, 2009

NEW claims have been made that the face of the National Rugby League, the Manly fullback Brett Stewart, was allegedly involved in an altercation surrounding a woman at a Central Coast hotel more than 12 months ago.

League bosses were made aware of the incident several weeks ago and were infuriated the Manly club had not passed on any details about the claims before Stewart was asked to be a key figure in the multimillion-dollar advertising campaign.

But the Manly chief executive, Grant Mayer, said he could not pass on the information because he was not aware of the incident. "I hadn't heard about it, it was unknown to us, we had not been contacted by the police or the motel operators," he said.

"Of course, we would have told the NRL, but we didn't know. Brett Stewart's reputation is important to him and the NRL chose someone with the right image of the game."

Stewart will take the field this Sunday for the first time this season after spending four rounds on the sideline after his drunken behaviour at the Manly club launch on March 6. Stewart also faced Manly Local Court on Tuesday where he pleaded not guilty to one count of sexual assault and one count of indecent assault on a 17-year-old girl later that night.

However, claims about Stewart's behaviour were allegedly brought to the attention of the NSW Police 14 months ago.

Sources have confirmed to the Herald that police were called to a Central Coast hotel where the Manly team was staying, several hours after being thrashed by the Melbourne Storm at Bluetongue Stadium on February 15, 2008. The hotel operators had rung the police about a scuffle involving two men, one of whom was Stewart. When the police attended the other man involved in the scuffle made accusations against Stewart that concerned his sister. However sources have told the Herald the woman refused to confirm the accusations and the police did not pursue the matter.

When the Herald asked the NRL chief, David Gallop, whether Stewart would have been used in NRL publicity if he had been aware of the Central Coast incident, he replied: "No, clearly if that were so, we would have taken a different view of using him as the face of the advertising campaign."

they didn't know?

how could Manly not
 
Messages
10,074
LOL, so the lady involved had nothing to say, and this article is so vitally important that they have deliberately held it back until a couple of days before his return
 
Messages
2,016
LOL, so the lady involved had nothing to say, and this article is so vitally important that they have deliberately held it back until a couple of days before his return

I love these stories, where the journos obviously know more than they are revealing and are waiting for Stewart/Manly/NRL to bring themselves undone in a web of bullsh*t.
 

wittyfan

Referee
Messages
29,998
Gallop must step in again with Uncle Max, Sean Penn and Mayer being as soft as sponges.

And was Watmough's fine eventually suspended?
 

Rodent

Bench
Messages
4,188
It is a poor story but we all know that a lot of sexual assaults go unreported. The victims are often too traumatised to make a complaint as they just want to forget about it and get on with their lives.
Just because a person doesn't want to press charges doesn't mean they don't care. The story however is pathetic because it just leaves a dark cloud hanging over Stewart without going into detail. Was the girl too traumatised to press charges or did she not have a leg to stand on because Stewart was innocent of any wrong doing? Stupid story!
 
Messages
21,880
I love these stories, where the journos obviously know more than they are revealing and are waiting for Stewart/Manly/NRL to bring themselves undone in a web of bullsh*t.


how do you figure she obviously knows more?

if her story was strong she would have a named witness. Clearly someone doesnt want to put their name to it becuase its a weak story.
 

Latest posts

Top