Josh Reynolds Charged

[Nobodyreally]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

 

[ElleryHanley]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

Actually, no...

NRL only stands them down for cases that carry ten years plus...

Josh's case does not...DeBelin's does.

 

[Ponyo]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

Actually, no...

NRL only stands them down for cases that carry ten years plus...

Josh's case does not...DeBelin's does.

Right. Can't draw parallels between JDB case and Reynolds' case. Full stop period.

 

[Nobodyreally]

Yes you can.. the 11 year rule is automatic.. other matters such as DV is discretionary.. which is why Walker was stood down .. and May for that matter despite the fact those penalties were less than 11 years... so the NRL cant say .. we think Walker should be stood down.. but Reynolds cant.. that would contradict the principles of "no fault"

 

[Nobodyreally]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

Actually, no...

NRL only stands them down for cases that carry ten years plus...

Josh's case does not...DeBelin's does.

Right. Can't draw parallels between JDB case and Reynolds' case. Full stop period.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/walker-stood-down-under-nrls-new-discretionary-powers/news-story/1daf287ff81a905749b9e34a4732a5b2

FULL STOP PERIOD

 

[Ponyo]

Not that it matters much. But please post the article for everyone else if it's behind paywall.

 

[Tiger5150]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

Actually, no...

NRL only stands them down for cases that carry ten years plus...

Josh's case does not...DeBelin's does.

And Dylan Walkers?

 

[ElleryHanley]

Even if the NRL thought he was innocent, they would still probably have to stand him down under the principles of "no fault".. they aren't making a judgement of innocence or guilt... but letting the court process take its cause.. otherwise they are saying the case against DeBelin looks stronger (thereby making a judgement).
If the case is weak (or even fictitious) you would hope its dismissed long before the next court date or the DPP decides not to proceed.. but that would be Reynolds only hope of playing week 1.

Actually, no...

NRL only stands them down for cases that carry ten years plus...

Josh's case does not...DeBelin's does.

And Dylan Walkers?

The NRL, especially under Grrenburg, are basically a 'reactionary' organisation. Nothing is done unless there is media pressure.

Walker had witnesses and a televised arrest.

Josh's case, purely imo, will be one they simply ignore and let it play out. Unless lurid details start to spring up, Greenburg won't do a thing.

 

[Nelson]

"Wests Tigers NRL star Josh Reynolds has pleaded not guilty to a charge relating to an alleged domestic violence incident.
The 30-year-old appeared on Wednesday at Sutherland Local Court where his lawyer Dan McGirr entered a plea of not guilty to domestic violence-related assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

Mr McGirr also told magistrate Sharon Freund that Reynolds would contest an apprehended violence order in place." - via FOXsports

Also said adjourned until August 2020, don't know what that means now

I don't think he's going to be stood down 851
Given that the alleged offences were committed in September. Also worth noting that Reynolds' lawyer made an application to contest the apprehended violence order (AVO).

Add to that there were no witnesses (unlike D***o Walker's case). From what I understand he's been charged with common assault which is a section 10 offence, weak case in my opinion. He wanted to break up with her.

He's been charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm (5 year max), not common assault (2 year max). I'm not sure what you mean by a "section 10 offence". "Section 10" is commonly used to refer to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act - the provision that deals with no conviction being recorded despite there being a plea of guilty/finding of guilt. You can theoretically get a section 10 for all kinds of offences, there is not really any notion of a "section 10 offence". The less serious the offence the more scope there is for a section 10 non-conviction is the general principle.
Hard to know if it's a "weak case" given that there is very little to go on. Two prosecution witnesses - likely the complainant and a recent complaint witness or a witness who observed the injuries shortly after the alleged incident. Not at all unusual for an allegation of this nature - most DV, when it happens, happens behind closed doors. I would generally not describe that type of case as "weak". They're "weak" when you know there are inconsistencies, or a clear motive to fabricate, or the complainant has obvious credibility problems - don't know any of that here...

 

[Ponyo]

Stop scaring folks with the minimum/maximum sentences.
This case is going no where.
They'll throw it out or section him.

Reynolds to claim medication, not violence, caused bruising on partner.

Wests Tigers playmaker Josh Reynolds will argue that "bruising" found on his ex-partner was not the result of violence, but instead a side-effect of "medication" she had been taking.

Mr Reynolds was present in Sutherland Local Count on Wednesday when a not guilty plea was entered for his domestic violence charge after allegations he had attacked his ex-partner, Arabella Del Busso, 29, in September. He allegedly left bruising on her right arm and left leg during the incident.

Josh Reynolds has appeared at Sutherland Court to plead not guilty to a charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

Lawyer Dan McGirr said there would be "a lot" of "expert" evidence that demonstrates the bruising was the result of medication use and not violence. Mr McGirr said "medical history" and "Centrelink and Medicare" documentation would be used as evidence to outline "what she was on and the effects that may have on someone".

Mr McGirr said the court would also hear from multiple "credibility witnesses" during the two-day hearing.

"Three at least and growing by the day," Mr McGirr told the magistrate.

The court will also hear from "two witnesses" from the prosecution.

Wests Tigers NRL player Josh Reynolds arrives at Sutherland Local Court facing a domestic violence charge on Wednesday. CREDIT:AAP

Mr Reynolds will have to wait until round 19 of the NRL season before the evidence is brought to light, with the case returning to court in July 2020.

Outside court, Mr McGirr said that while he was "not going to make comment", the facts "speak for themselves".

"We'll let the legal course take its course," he said.

Mr Reynolds allegedly assaulted Ms Del Busso in Caringbah South, the suburb in which Reynolds currently resides, between 7pm and 11pm on September 12.

Reynolds was arrested and charged last Wednesday after his then partner presented at St George Police Station.CREDIT:AAP

The pair were in a long-term relationship but are no longer together.

Mr Reynolds was arrested and charged last Wednesday after Ms Del Busso presented to St George Police Station. He was given bail due to his "community ties" and his lack of criminal history.

"It is unlikely a custodial sentence would be imposed for this matter," court documents said.

 

[Guest]

Ponyo - settle down or you can have a spell - be respectful to others on here.

 

[Ponyo]

Ponyo - settle down or you can have a spell - be respectful to others on here.

Noted with thanks.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

Is it necessary to include n the article that the young lady has some connection with Centrelink, hinting at _________? This makes me most uncomfortable.

 

[gallagher]

"Wests Tigers NRL star Josh Reynolds has pleaded not guilty to a charge relating to an alleged domestic violence incident.
The 30-year-old appeared on Wednesday at Sutherland Local Court where his lawyer Dan McGirr entered a plea of not guilty to domestic violence-related assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

Mr McGirr also told magistrate Sharon Freund that Reynolds would contest an apprehended violence order in place." - via FOXsports

Also said adjourned until August 2020, don't know what that means now

I don't think he's going to be stood down 851
Given that the alleged offences were committed in September. Also worth noting that Reynolds' lawyer made an application to contest the apprehended violence order (AVO).

Add to that there were no witnesses (unlike D***o Walker's case). From what I understand he's been charged with common assault which is a section 10 offence, weak case in my opinion. He wanted to break up with her.

He's been charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm (5 year max), not common assault (2 year max). I'm not sure what you mean by a "section 10 offence". "Section 10" is commonly used to refer to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act - the provision that deals with no conviction being recorded despite there being a plea of guilty/finding of guilt. You can theoretically get a section 10 for all kinds of offences, there is not really any notion of a "section 10 offence". The less serious the offence the more scope there is for a section 10 non-conviction is the general principle.
Hard to know if it's a "weak case" given that there is very little to go on. Two prosecution witnesses - likely the complainant and a recent complaint witness or a witness who observed the injuries shortly after the alleged incident. Not at all unusual for an allegation of this nature - most DV, when it happens, happens behind closed doors. I would generally not describe that type of case as "weak". They're "weak" when you know there are inconsistencies, or a clear motive to fabricate, or the complainant has obvious credibility problems - don't know any of that here...

Thanks for your posts about legal technicalities Nelson. Much appreciated.