Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[wittyfan]

It's okay to admit you're Canadian.

 

[CanadianEagle]

I would if I was, i'll just be livin there in a few weeks time

 

[Azkatro]

He allegedly forced his tongue into her mouth and had sexual intercourse without her consent. Yet the DNA results came back negative?

 

[wittyfan]

Times were so good too.

 

[caspersparks]

Im not french canadian, im not even canadian buddy!

i'm not your buddy, pal..
i'm not your pal, friend...


i amuse myself..

 

[zaku]

so are Manly ever going to punish Stewart?

For what?

Wait until he is convicted.

Innocent until proven guilty.....You been in Australia long?


:crazy::crazy::crazy:

Or we could just punish players based on accusations? Good work chops

 

[El Diablo]

bringing the game into disrepute

the NRL are the onle ones who have punished him

 

[Tommax25]

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

And was Watmough's fine eventually suspended?

Do you mean for these new revelations or for the old incidents 4 week punishment being up and stewart playing again?

 

[herbert henry1908]

bringing the game into disrepute

the NRL are the onle ones who have punished him

why then is there a need for manly to punish him?


do you think he should be punished twice for the same crime?

 

[Jatz Crackers]

bringing the game into disrepute

the NRL are the onle ones who have punished him

What exactly do you assert has been done that causes the game to be disreputable ?

 

[El Diablo]

are all Manly supporters as thick as two bricks :?

 

[Jatz Crackers]

are all Manly supporters as thick as two bricks :?

Are all post whores brainless sh!tstirrers ?

 

[Pumba]

Stewart lawyers seek school records

Lawyers for Manly rugby league star Brett Stewart want access to documents, including school records, relating to a teenager he is accused of sexually assaulting.

The 24-year-old fullback was not present in Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court on Tuesday when his case was briefly mentioned.

He is charged with having sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old girl without her consent on the evening of March 6 at North Manly.

He also is charged with assault with an act of indecency, namely that he "forced his tongue into her month".

Magistrate Julie Huber was told 11 subpoenas had been issued for various documents, including hospital, medical and school records.

Some documents had not yet been received, but the magistrate said when they were, the teenager's lawyer could inspect them first.

She continued Stewart's bail until the matter is mentioned again on June 23.

If he is legally represented, Stewart will not be required to attend on that date.

Brisbane Times

 

[God-King Dean]

He is charged with having sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old girl without her consent on the evening of March 6 at North Manly.

He also is charged with assault with an act of indecency, namely that he "forced his tongue into her month".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that first paragraph ain't right. He hasn't been accused of rape.

The 2nd paragraph I haven't heard before.

 

[Simo]

He is charged with having sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old girl without her consent on the evening of March 6 at North Manly.

He also is charged with assault with an act of indecency, namely that he "forced his tongue into her month".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that first paragraph ain't right. He hasn't been accused of rape.

The 2nd paragraph I haven't heard before.

From what ive been told from following this, sticking your fingers in constitues rape. Any penetration apparently is the law.

So since he allegedly 'digitally penetrated her' this is rape. But not the rape your thinking of.

 

[Eels Dude]

So his lawyers are going to turn it into a character attack against this girl? No wonder a lot of women don't want to press sexual assault charges.

 

[Rockin Ronny]

are all Manly supporters as thick as two bricks :?

Absolutely. It's what sets them apart.

 

[Big Time]

So his lawyers are going to turn it into a character attack against this girl? No wonder a lot of women don't want to press sexual assault charges.

If he is guilty, he will be found guilty. I have faith in Australia's justice system. We have one of the best in the world. Whilst I do not always think they get the sentencing correct, I have no doubt the generally get the judgement correct.

Stewart has been branded as guilty by the media. If he needs to investigate the character of the person, whom is accusing him, so that he can prove his innocence, then that that is fair game. If she is telling the truth then she should not be concerned. She will be attacking his character in much the same way. I hope for her sake she is not being pushed into this by a third party.

Based on what is presented to us through the media, I doubt any of us have any f*cking clue if he is guilty or not. All just heresay at this point.

I was with a girl once when I was younger. She had a boyfriend at the time. I knew this but she was a good sort, I didn't know him, so I was up for it. She approached me and was the instigator of everything that happened. Whether through guilt or because he found out, she then told people I forced myself on her. This was totally untrue but what could I do. It was her word against mine. She never went to police or anything (probably because she knew she would be proved a liar), but word of mouth can be just as damaging.

Fortunately in Australia, we have innocent until proven guilty although the media seems to forget this.

 

[herbert henry1908]

So his lawyers are going to turn it into a character attack against this girl? No wonder a lot of women don't want to press sexual assault charges.

Like it or not thats the way its supposed to be.

A defence lawyer should be mounting a vigorous case for his client.

 

[bartman]

He allegedly forced his tongue into her mouth and had sexual intercourse without her consent. Yet the DNA results came back negative?

A condom (hopefully) would mean a negative DNA test re the second... no idea about why a DNA test for the first would return a negative - cleaned her teeth before the cops got there perhaps?

Just speculation in answer to the question, not trying to make any point or accusation.