Brett Stewart found not guilty of sexual assault

[bartman]

Bartman is probably the ONLY sane member of this forum......apart from myself of course *cough* and he's also unbiased and fair unlike the majority on here.

I am biased against stupid behaviour by my fellow men though :lol:... like making all the choices that led up to one being landed with a sexual assault charge against his name.

 

[Ryan]

So, Gallop should now stand DOWN right?

 

[Garts]

Good advice.
Seeing as the average Manly man has an IQ of 3, it would be better that Manly fans don;t take a view on anything.

Still 3 times higher than yourself.

 

[bartman]

Too early for me to be relieved I guess, but I am a little bit...

So what does that now mean?:shock:

It simply means they don't have a piece of evidence that they didn't need to have before laying charges... and in Brett's favour it means that it's harder to build a case of sexual assault than if they had this evidence.

And just because I know someone will jump on and say it... it doesn't mean the stance the NRL is taking by standing down players facing charges of this nature while they are resolved is wrong or bad for the game in any way.

 

[HDWicked]

This was just put on the Daily Telegraph website.

POLICE DNA tests have returned no evidence to support a sexual assault charge against Manly fullback Brett Stewart.
The Daily Telegraph understands results of all major DNA samples taken in the aftermath of last Friday's alleged incident were returned to police this afternoon, with Stewart cleared by the tests.
Police have charged the Manly fullback with sexual assault of a 17-year-old girl.
Full coverage: Brett Stewart and Manly controversy
The alleged victim also underwent DNA testing and the Daily Telegraph understands that her results have also turned up no supporting evidence.
Both Stewart's manager George Mimis and barrister Geoff Bellew refused to comment.
Source: The Daily Telegraph.




So does this now mean charges are dropped???

What happens I have no idea how the law works

 

[Kiki]

i dont think it means the charges will be dropped, the fact that they charged him before the results came through means they have other evidence.

thats good news for him though!

 

[Beavers Headgear]

Was never in any doubt

 

[The Colonel]

Was never in any doubt

While the DNA tests may be negative they may not form the basis of the entire charge - particularly given the fact he was charged without them. Will probably still have to wait and see what happens in a few weeks.

 

[bartman]

This is a result that will have many involved in the game breathing a sigh of relief. The final sigh of relief or otherwise will only come after the court resolves the charge.

But agree it doesn't automatically mean that the charges that were laid without this evidence will be dropped now.

 

[watatank]

He was probably charged because he says he doesn't remember what happened because he was drunk

 

[herbert henry1908]

this doesnt mean he didnt do it , but it does help his case.

Without DNA i would have thought its going to he a hard charge to prove. unless offcourse there is a direct witness.

 

[The Colonel]

He was probably charged because he says he doesn't remember what happened because he was drunk

They'd need more evidence than that to base any sort of charge on him, particularly one this serious....

 

[HDWicked]

So now its basically down to "her" word against "his"????? I mean I know the media DONT always report things right... But from memory the alleged attack happened in stairwell, then it happened out front and the girls dad stopped it, then there were witnesses. I mean I hope for gods sake this poor girl didnt have this happen to her, but how many different stories is there!

 

[herbert henry1908]

So now its basically down to "her" word against "his"????? I mean I know the media DONT always report things right... But from memory the alleged attack happened in stairwell, then it happened out front and the girls dad stopped it, then there were witnesses. I mean I hope for gods sake this poor girl didnt have this happen to her, but how many different stories is there!

unless there is a witness to the alleged sexual assault , i would think it is her word against his.

 

[bartman]

So now its basically down to "her" word against "his"????? I mean I know the media DONT always report things right... But from memory the alleged attack happened in stairwell, then it happened out front and the girls dad stopped it, then there were witnesses. I mean I hope for gods sake this poor girl didnt have this happen to her, but how many different stories is there!

The different stories so far are the media's doing... publishing hearsay or comments gleaned in the heat of the moment.

In any case the only stories that count are those given to police by those involved or witnesses. That will be what the court judges.

 

[Eels Dude]

This doesn't really mean anything. It would just mean the tests were inconclusive. It may help his defence but really there if there is other physical evidence against him it it doesn't really change things to much, but it's a positive outcome for him at least.

 

[sneagle]

If it was (?) the "alledged digital penetration" put forward, and would seem supported by the DNA samples taken and requested by the police - could one assume that was the assault suggested by the alledged victim and her family? If this is seems unlikely to be the case what would another possible scenario be?

 

[HDWicked]

Fair Enough.... I was just unsure how the court would look at all this with so many different versions of events that happened.... I mean its so hard to know who to believe.... One side you want to believe Stewart because he is a great footballer and seems like a great guy, but on other side you wanna make sure IF he did do it... this poor girl gets to see justice served....

 

[Shorty]

Agreed Eels dude.
What is the percentage of DNA found in most sexual assault cases?

This helps Stewart but by no means does it mean he's off.
And I'm pretty sure they must have a strong case against him if they charged him without these results..

 

[bartman]

I'd recommend not assuming... it's going to be an emotional rollercaoster for Manly fans if you choose to put yourselves through all that.

The media is (has?) going to take this in twists and turns right up until it's resolved either way. The NRL have given Brett five weeks off to prepare hismelf for his defence, and get this as far away as possible from the product on the field.

Manly have (belatedly) accepted the decision. If charges are dropped Stewart may be back earlier, but until then better just not assuming and preparing yourselves for the ride.