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.
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.
Information has been suppressed by the courts.
Hasnt the law change were you cant use alcohol as defenseThe 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
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 thinkThe info I was referencing/defence angle had nothing to do with Brett Stewart being smashed.
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
which has been suppressed by the court - so I won't repeat it
Good boy! One of my faves already![]()
[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.