Interesting background to the Brett Stewart case

[cktiger]

**Not all victims of sexual assault got to church every Sunday and bake cakes for the school fete**. Just because a girl that claims assault isn't the picture of purity that we would all like, doesn't mean she is not a victim. For a matter to even make it to district court trial there are checks and balances to ensure there is enough evidence for it to proceed. The Police have to meet certain levels before charging, the DPP have to meet certain levels before accepting to prosecute, this is called 'prima facie'. Basically this means, is there enough smoke here for there to be a fire. In this case, yes. Stewart dodged a very large bullet. Basically he picked the right girl to touch up in that she had a rough enough back ground that when it all went before a jury he was able to pay one of the most expensive silks to murky and cloud the water so much that there is no way a jury could find him guilty beyond a reasonale doubt. That's why his legal fees are so high, he paid the best barrister to twist every word of every witness, to make the cops look incompetent and plant that element of doubt into the minds of the 12 punters picked off the street to sit on the jury. Every good defence barrister knows that once you've instilled that element of doubt, juries are sh@t scared to convict. It happens every day in our judicial system. Also, you can't sue anyone as a result of being found not guilty. Because it made it to a District Court Trial that means the bench marks that the checks and balances are there to ensure are met along the way worked, thus there was case for him to answer. Stewart was lucky he picked a sh#t vicitm who has a chequered past that gave his defence team enough ammo to stuff her and her father up in court. As I said, he dodged a very big bullet.

And not all boofheaded footballers are rapists.
I'm not saying Stewart is Mr Sunshine but he has had his day in court and been found not guilty of this.
You are making the same assumption about him as you say the jury did about the girl involved.
If you REALLY know he did something wrong maybe you should have rocked up and testified.

 

[Leich-a-tiger]

Who knows what to think? The father of the girl sounds like a very manipulative and dangerous person. However, it doesn't automatically follow that the allegations aren't true -as the saying goes "not everything a dishonest man says is a lie". In any event, the situation is an absolute travesty. Either a girl has been sexually assaulted, but made out to be a liar, or an innocent man has had his reputation destroyed because of a false accusation.

 

[Yossarian]

Whoa! You've just declared him guilty despite not being found so in court. Of course, not guilty does not mean innocent, but as innocent until proven guilty, having not been proven so means that such a claim is slanderous. That's why he sued the Tele. You have assumed him guilty and that is an injustice to him. Accusations should never equate to guilt.

I can't see how he has declared him guilty. Similar to Yossarian, I think he is mainly arguing that if the circumstances of the case were exactly as depicted in this article, it would not have made it to court.

The story seemed very pro-Stewart. I'm not disputing if it is true or not - to be honest I have no idea. I do find it hard to believe the DPP (I'm assuming it was serious enough to pass their desk) would have pursued the case if it was as flimsy as the SMH story implied. Also if the police reaction at the time was as clearcut as presented it seems odd they would have carried the case forward. Clearly someone thought there was enough substance to carry it forward.

There are a few other things not mentioned in this article that pushed the case to court. The whole article reads as though this lady is looking to trash her father in the press. What are her motives?

Yeah that is exactly what I'm saying. My personal experience with the DPP (well the CDPP at least) is that they are very conservative when it comes to prosecuting. Their threshold was more that they needed to believe they would gain a conviction (as opposed to believing there was sufficient proof of guilt). I have very few dealings with the SDPP so I'm not sure what their mindset is.

The other daughter obviously has an issue with her father. Perhaps it is justified - I really don't know.

 

[gold_on_black]

**Not all victims of sexual assault got to church every Sunday and bake cakes for the school fete**. Just because a girl that claims assault isn't the picture of purity that we would all like, doesn't mean she is not a victim. For a matter to even make it to district court trial there are checks and balances to ensure there is enough evidence for it to proceed. The Police have to meet certain levels before charging, the DPP have to meet certain levels before accepting to prosecute, this is called 'prima facie'. Basically this means, is there enough smoke here for there to be a fire. In this case, yes. Stewart dodged a very large bullet. Basically he picked the right girl to touch up in that she had a rough enough back ground that when it all went before a jury he was able to pay one of the most expensive silks to murky and cloud the water so much that there is no way a jury could find him guilty beyond a reasonale doubt. That's why his legal fees are so high, he paid the best barrister to twist every word of every witness, to make the cops look incompetent and plant that element of doubt into the minds of the 12 punters picked off the street to sit on the jury. Every good defence barrister knows that once you've instilled that element of doubt, juries are sh@t scared to convict. It happens every day in our judicial system. Also, you can't sue anyone as a result of being found not guilty. Because it made it to a District Court Trial that means the bench marks that the checks and balances are there to ensure are met along the way worked, thus there was case for him to answer. Stewart was lucky he picked a sh#t vicitm who has a chequered past that gave his defence team enough ammo to stuff her and her father up in court. As I said, he dodged a very big bullet.

And not all boofheaded footballers are rapists.
I'm not saying Stewart is Mr Sunshine but he has had his day in court and been found not guilty of this.
You are making the same assumption about him as you say the jury did about the girl involved.
If you REALLY know he did something wrong maybe you should have rocked up and testified.

I agree with both posts…
But I have to point out ck that statistically those with a history of bad behavior or are past offenders are likely to be offenders again.

Although fair enough this does not occur in all cases
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[cktiger]

I get your point GOB but there is a big difference between bad behaviour and what he was accused of.
I have met the guy and wasn't really impressed by him - but it seems from the original story he copped the pointy end of the stick here.
If anybody knows different they should have spoken up at his trial.

 

[stryker]

This is a terrible story. If completely true, this Nero character needs a bullet for sure. The guy they have called Angus seems to have copped it way worse than Stewart..surprised he hasnt done anything about it.

I was never convinced of Stewarts guilt, the Telegraph were on a mission and I am glad he was found not guilty and then sued them.

To Merlot tiger…you have made some bold claims here mate. If you have no evidence to back this up then I suggest you shut up. Nothing you have said is helpful whatsoever. It is my experience that there isnt always fire when smoke is sighted. People are prosecuted on very dodgy evidence from time to time. I know of a bloke who served time for an alleged rape that was consentual sex. The girl at the center of it admitted years after that it was all bull crap. Witnesses at the house at the time - both male and female heard them in the bedroom and her screams were not get off me....they were encouraging to say the least. All these people testified and he still served time.

Brett Stewart, IMO was hard done by and he will never shake the mud. Quite a few on here still call him a rapist. I call him a very talented yet grubby player.