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

Dutchy

Immortal
Messages
33,887
Ok, there are going to be a lot of different articles and media reports regarding Bretts court case today. Try to keep everything in one thread hey.. Dont make things hard on me.
 

Dutchy

Immortal
Messages
33,887
SHOULD Brett Stewart be stood down again? Detailed evidence surrounding Stewart's sexual assault charges will be publicly aired as police prosecutors argue for the matter to be taken to a District Court trial.
Stewart was charged after an alleged incident involving a 17-year-old girl on March 6 last year, just hours after Manly's now-infamous season launch.
The 24-year-old has maintained his innocence, but Sea Eagles officials have been secretly preparing for every scenario over the past week.
Today's hearing was discussed at length at last Thursday night's board meeting. Unlike 12 months ago - when passions ran high after the Stewart accusations exploded in their faces - there were plenty of cool heads in the room.


The last thing Manly want is another public slanging match with NRL boss David Gallop. There's now a degree of remorse over last year's stand-off, which blew up when the board refused to accede to Gallop's request to stand Stewart down, forcing the NRL to impose a four-week ban.
Manly CEO Graham Lowe has already held preliminary discussions with Gallop about a range of possible outcomes and responses, to ensure both the Sea Eagles and NRL are on the same page.
There's also acknowledgement that evidence and statements tendered in court today could be highly inflammatory, particularly if the magistrate rules against Stewart and orders a trial.
And that's why Manly officials agree they need to keep their minds open to standing Stewart down from playing duties, should it be in the club's best interest. Whatever the outcome today - and whatever option Manly decide to take - there's also a unanimous commitment to support Stewart through to a final verdict, regardless of whether he plays or not.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...tt-stewart-again/story-e6frexnr-1225826551959
 

Dutchy

Immortal
Messages
33,887
THE psychiatrist who's been treating a teenage girl who has accused Manly rugby league star Brett Stewart of sexual assault is due to give evidence at his committal hearing. The 24-year-old fullback arrived for the hearing at Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court today hand-in-hand with his girlfriend Jamie Baker.
Stewart is charged with having sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old girl without her consent on the evening of March 6 last year at North Manly.
He also is charged with assault with an act of indecency, namely that he "forced his tongue into her mouth".
At the start of his committal hearing, a lawyer for the Crown tendered numerous documents to Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul Cloran.
She told him evidence would be called from the psychiatrist who was treating the teenager, "at the relevant period of time".
Clive Steirn, SC, for Stewart, told the magistrate the footballer was a diabetic and may need to leave the hearing at some stage to have some fruit juice.


The Magistrate has temporarily adjourned the hearing so he can read the tendered material.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...l-hearing-begins/story-e6freuy9-1225826654589
 
Messages
7
The suppressed evidence made its way into the Daily Terrors website for a little while today. It made for some very interesting reading...should it proceed to trial those that saw the article will all know the angle that the defence will take. In fact I would be surprised if it did make its way to trial given the psychiatrists evidence coupled with the lack of DNA present vs the accusations. But I am merely making supposition with no legal knowledge
 

Gaba

First Grade
Messages
8,197
The suppressed evidence made its way into the Daily Terrors website for a little while today. It made for some very interesting reading...should it proceed to trial those that saw the article will all know the angle that the defence will take. In fact I would be surprised if it did make its way to trial given the psychiatrists evidence coupled with the lack of DNA present vs the accusations. But I am merely making supposition with no legal knowledge
Hasnt the law change were you cant use alcohol as defense
 

Gaba

First Grade
Messages
8,197
The info I was referencing/defence angle had nothing to do with Brett Stewart being smashed.
Yes i understnad that but if there was a chance there would be no trial his defense wouldnt bring alcohol into it in a bid for defense, which means stewart may have more to answer then you think

and his representatives know it will likely go to trial
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
60,412
Gaba, no one's mentioning alcohol...so I don't see what it has to do with anything.

The evidence would have to be extremely compromising to prevent this going to trial however. It's basically a rubber stamping process whose primary use is for the defence and the crown to test the evidence and see each others arguments before the trial these days.
 

watatank

Coach
Messages
14,226
Things are looking grim for Stewart if this is true



http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ett-stewarts-penis-visible-20100204-nfz4.html
Father says Brett Stewart's penis visible
February 4, 2010 - 7:23PM


Brett Stewart's pants were undone and his "old guy" was visible when a father confronted the Manly rugby league star about sex assault claims, a court has been told.


The father told police his 17-year-old daughter had pointed to a man in a suit, whom she said had just "hurt her".


He said he confronted the man, who denied touching his daughter, and pointed to a nearby townhouse where he said he lived and from where a woman came out.


"She looked towards his crotch and said 'why are your pants undone?' and pointed at his crotch," the father said.


The father told police the man was clearly drunk and he noticed the man's belt was open and his fly was undone.


"I could clearly see his old guy," he said, later describing what he saw as the top of the man's penis, still inside his pants.


The statements were included in the prosecution brief of evidence tendered at Stewart's committal hearing on Thursday at Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court.


Stewart, 24, is charged with having sexual intercourse, involving digital penetration, with the girl without her consent on the evening of March 6, 2009 at North Manly.


The full-back also is charged with assault with an act of indecency, namely that he "forced his tongue into her mouth".


Last April, Stewart's lawyer formally entered pleas of not guilty.


In her tendered statement, the girl said she was outside the Manly townhouse complex when a man pulled up in a taxi.


He asked her what she was doing and when she replied having a cigarette, he said "yuck".


The teenager said she could see he was drunk.


She said the man lent towards her face and "before I had time to move or react he put his tongue in my mouth".


She pushed him in the chest, he again put his tongue in her mouth and she again pushed him, the teenager told police.


The man immediately then put one of his hands under her shorts and knickers and placed at least one finger in her vagina, she said.


She managed to push him off and ran to tell her father, as she "started to cry and shake".
The father told police when he confronted the man, he yelled at him and denied touching his daughter.


"The guy kept saying something about 'don't you know who I am' and something about football," the father said.


"I didn't know what he was talking about because I don't follow football."
In one of her statements, the girl said: "I think about what happened all the time and it makes me feel ashamed and heaps sad.


"I didn't do anything to make him do this to me."
Deputy chief magistrate Paul Cloran adjourned the hearing to March 22.
AAP
 
Messages
7
Yes, that is what has been allowed to be reported. One would assume based on allegations made there would be some DNA evidence (remember there is none). And the second point (which has been suppressed by the court - so I won't repeat it) will be used by the defence will call into question it happening at all.
 

^_^

Juniors
Messages
384
Its weird how the girl can supress evidence against her yet Stewart's gets reported....either way truth or not it hurt to read something like that :(
 
Last edited:

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
Why is that weird. I never saw the suppressed information like some of you have been privy too but if it was I understood it to be then it cannot be legally released into the public domain anyway.

http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/public...d_courts_and_suppression_orders.html#p10-0020

[10-0080] Confidential communications




Part 5 Div 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act contains a number of provisions to protect the privilege of sexual assault counselling communications. Those provisions relate mostly to the disclosure, production and admissibility of the protected counselling communications but s 302 gives the court power to make ancillary orders to limit the possible harm of disclosure of a protected confidence. The orders a court may make include orders that all or part of the evidence of the protected communication be heard in camera and such orders relating to the suppression of publication of all or part of the evidence as are considered necessary to protect the safety and welfare of any protected confider.
Sections 126A–126F of the Evidence Act 1995 relate to Professional Confidential Relationship Privilege. The provisions are mostly about the exclusion of evidence of protected confidences but s 126E gives the court power to make ancillary orders to limit the possible harm caused by disclosure of evidence of a protected confidence or protected identity information. The ancillary orders a court may make include orders that all or part of the evidence be heard in camera and such orders relating to the suppression of publication of all or part of the evidence as are necessary to protect the safety and welfare of the protected confider.


The evidence that has been released can be released.
 

Latest posts

Top