News: Sins of the Father

[wombatgc]

RE: Sins of the Father

It's amazing how many non Manly people still believe he's guilty as sin. The trouble is that 99.9 per cent of those people won't read this and thats bloody sad,

I know he is innocent without any doubt, but I am still not reading it.

:huh:

 

[manlyfan76]

RE: Sins of the Father

Not enough bad can happen to this creep, the sad part is he will keep finding more victims.

 

[Top End Eagle]

RE: Sins of the Father

Get over yourself Jatz.

I was illustrating the point that the police called to the unit were obligated to follow through with the initial complaint regardless of the complainant's familial bond with a person who may or may not have been known to those particular officers.

I think that this point is relevant considering the volatile atmosphere within this thread.

Good night everybody - get some rest for Monday.

 

[manlyfan76]

RE: Sins of the Father

Waits for someone to comment about it being bedtime for all children....

 

[Technical Coach]

RE: Sins of the Father

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

My main annoyance before and during the trial was in relation to one eyed supporters and their one eyed support under the guise of "innocent until proven guilty" mantra when really that was not their honest reasoning.

Oh FFS what a load of bollocks. You dont know when someone is posting honest reasoning or not. Your ego is as bad as our refs boss.

You would have to be brain dead to ignore the signs of it or in denial---oh and the ego i don't mind being compared to one of the best refs the game has seen who lifted the standards bringing in a more professional approach.

Billy understands the game inside out knows what coaches are up to and does his best to address the issues---it would not matter who the refs boss is they are always doomed to fail in the eyes of most supporters.

Do you know anyone else best suited for the role other than myself lol.(just taking away one cheap shot reply and wanting to be surprised for once)

 

[globaleagle]

RE: Sins of the Father

Thanks for posting the article.

I feel......

sombre.

 

[bob dylan]

Sins of the Father

Thanks for posting the article.

I feel......

sombre.

Glad to hear your off the drink.

 

[Masked Eagle]

RE: Sins of the Father

Is it any wonder people are screwed up for life when they have guys like this as their parents? Just such a sad story.

 

[weev]

RE: Sins of the Father

One of the best articles I have read. Wets the appetite for a possible forthcoming book.

It provides such a compelling case, and a great yarn, that will go a long way to clearing stewart's name and reputation.

Some people think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, in most disputes. I often do. But after reading about 'that guy', I really question the media for fuelling flames that should have been stomped on almost instantly and then allowed to go to the ridiculous lengths it did. And I question the police and the current legal system that can allow a compulsive liar and manipulator so many chances to do harm to others for personal gain.

 

[voicefromthehill]

RE: Sins of the Father

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

That's my question which I asked earlier - why did Brett's Barrister conceed there was a Prima Facie case? I clearly remember that being said, headlines like "Stewart has case to answer" resulted. I'm sure there is a simple explanation

Found a link

 

[weev]

RE: Sins of the Father

"In the days following the incident, News Ltd papers ran with lines like, "Brett Stewart was so drunk he cannot remember allegedly attacking a teenage girl but witnesses claim the footballer had to be pulled off the 17-year-old" ... "Police witnesses told The Daily Telegraph Stewart exited the taxi ... and crash tackled the girl" ... "The Daily Telegraph has learned the diabetic Manly star was so drunk he could not immediately remember what took place."

.. from the corporation that hacks into murdered children's phones!

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

RE: Sins of the Father

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

That's my question which I asked earlier - why did Brett's Barrister conceed there was a Prima Facie case? I clearly remember that being said, headlines like "Stewart has case to answer" resulted. I'm sure there is a simple explanation

Found a link

That was not controversial from what I could tell.

Unless impossible inconsistencies were revealed within the prosecution's own case, there would always be a finding of 'prima facie case'. There were obvious weaknesses in the crown case but that didn't mean they hadn't got to prima facie level.

Sometimes even though the evidence is capable of making prima facie, the charges might be withdrawn when the prosecution concedes they will have a lot of trouble getting a verdict beyond reasonable doubt. However this time they decided the 'safest' course was leave it to the courts to consider, and not be the judge and jury themsleves. You can try to guess why? Clue - rightly or wrongly, there has been criticism in the past when allegations involving league players never made it to court.

 

[manlywarringah]

While it was disgusting the way Brett was treated, it may have been better for it to go to court so everyone could see what a shame the whole episode was.

If it was thrown out before, all we would've heard about was another footballer who didn't have to answer anything.

The people who kept up with the case know he was innocent. The people who only read the telecrap headlines are the ones who thinks he may have done something.

It's a shame those same people probably won't read the smh and get the facts.

I for one am glad someone followed through with the bigger story. It deserves to be told.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

My main annoyance before and during the trial was in relation to one eyed supporters and their one eyed support under the guise of "innocent until proven guilty" mantra when really that was not their honest reasoning.

Oh FFS what a load of bollocks. You dont know when someone is posting honest reasoning or not. Your ego is as bad as our refs boss.

You would have to be brain dead to ignore the signs of it or in denial---oh and the ego i don't mind being compared to one of the best refs the game has seen

No Technical Coach. Sprouting that everyone else is in denial or ignoring signs doesnt cover up your lack of judgement.

---

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

That's my question which I asked earlier - why did Brett's Barrister conceed there was a Prima Facie case? I clearly remember that being said, headlines like "Stewart has case to answer" resulted. I'm sure there is a simple explanation

Found a link

Just shows what problems can occur with elements of the law. The fact it was conceded Stewart was there at the scene & that some exchange including contact occurred between the parties might mean prima facie. I regard that as an error and the case should never have past comittal stage. What other evidence did the prosecution have other than the allegation.

 

[wombatgc]

RE: Sins of the Father

EDIT - The identity of the family were supressed by the court during the trial and I also assume that was the reason behind not naming them in this article Bones. They may also wish to remain anonymous for the sake of their children , which we should respect.

Those inclined can search the internet themselves if they are desperate to know this guys identity. Otherwise I casn see no value in making making allegations about his identity in this forum .

I'm sure you understand.

I think that is an over-reaction. Bones wasn't talking about the person's name that was suppressed, he was talking about a guy that owed thousands in rent and was on fraud charges. Then said make up your own mind. I don't remember anywhere that Bones said the persons were one and the same. I don't see why we should have to kowtow to a suppression order from the court on a football forum. the more people know of this evil pricks real identity, the better chance those kids will have .

 

[voicefromthehill]

RE: Sins of the Father

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

That's my question which I asked earlier - why did Brett's Barrister conceed there was a Prima Facie case? I clearly remember that being said, headlines like "Stewart has case to answer" resulted. I'm sure there is a simple explanation

Found a link

That was not controversial from what I could tell.

Unless impossible inconsistencies were revealed within the prosecution's own case, there would always be a finding of 'prima facie case'. There were obvious weaknesses in the crown case but that didn't mean they hadn't got to prima facie level.

Sometimes even though the evidence is capable of making prima facie, the charges might be withdrawn when the prosecution concedes they will have a lot of trouble getting a verdict beyond reasonable doubt. However this time they decided the 'safest' course was leave it to the courts to consider, and not be the judge and jury themsleves. You can try to guess why? Clue - rightly or wrongly, there has been criticism in the past when allegations involving league players never made it to court.

Thanks for clearing that up SER8, my limited legal knowledge (Law and Order TV series) meant I didn't understand the process

Cheers
VFTH

 

[Napper]

RE: Sins of the Father

In the criminal justice system, sexually-based offenses are considered especially heinous. In New York City, the dedicated detectives who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Special Victims Unit. These are their stories.

 

[Technical Coach]

My main annoyance before and during the trial was in relation to one eyed supporters and their one eyed support under the guise of "innocent until proven guilty" mantra when really that was not their honest reasoning.

Oh FFS what a load of bollocks. You dont know when someone is posting honest reasoning or not. Your ego is as bad as our refs boss.

You would have to be brain dead to ignore the signs of it or in denial---oh and the ego i don't mind being compared to one of the best refs the game has seen

No Technical Coach. Sprouting that everyone else is in denial or ignoring signs doesnt cover up your lack of judgement.

---

This is true but ask yourself if your daughter was in the care of this Nero character and had made the allegation would you want the police to disregard it on the basis of her - father/stepfather/whoever is bonking your ex-wife, being a goose?

Holds no relevance at all. Prima facie case was never even made.

That's my question which I asked earlier - why did Brett's Barrister conceed there was a Prima Facie case? I clearly remember that being said, headlines like "Stewart has case to answer" resulted. I'm sure there is a simple explanation

Found a link

Just shows what problems can occur with elements of the law. The fact it was conceded Stewart was there at the scene & that some exchange including contact occurred between the parties might mean prima facie. I regard that as an error and the case should never have past comittal stage. What other evidence did the prosecution have other than the allegation.

---

Did i state "everyone" was or is in denial---a fair few were though. Without any evidence themselves they were willing to support purely on team colours and the odd 1 min nice experiences they have had with someone they don't really know.

Weev
"Some people think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, in most disputes. I often do"

This is the line i take and why i don't trust both parties versions of events and it's also why before the trial i mentioned on this forum for people to keep their opinions to themselves and let the courts decide.

If people here want to interpret my messages as anti Brett so be it---i just keep an open mind and don't trust from both sides their version of events---and for the 1,000000000 that does not mean i think Brett is guilty.

 

[Chip and Chase]

RE: Sins of the Father

EDIT - The identity of the family were supressed by the court during the trial and I also assume that was the reason behind not naming them in this article Bones. They may also wish to remain anonymous for the sake of their children , which we should respect.

Those inclined can search the internet themselves if they are desperate to know this guys identity. Otherwise I casn see no value in making making allegations about his identity in this forum .

I'm sure you understand.

I think that is an over-reaction. Bones wasn't talking about the person's name that was suppressed, he was talking about a guy that owed thousands in rent and was on fraud charges. Then said make up your own mind. I don't remember anywhere that Bones said the persons were one and the same. I don't see why we should have to kowtow to a suppression order from the court on a football forum. the more people know of this evil pricks real identity, the better chance those kids will have .

You're being disingenuous, the intent of the original post was to name the guy. Pure and simple. If anyone wants to find out who he is then I'm sure they can, it didn't take Bones too long to dig it up.

 

[ManlyBacker]

RE: Sins of the Father

EDIT - The identity of the family were supressed by the court during the trial and I also assume that was the reason behind not naming them in this article Bones. They may also wish to remain anonymous for the sake of their children , which we should respect.

Those inclined can search the internet themselves if they are desperate to know this guys identity. Otherwise I casn see no value in making making allegations about his identity in this forum .

I'm sure you understand.

I think that is an over-reaction. Bones wasn't talking about the person's name that was suppressed, he was talking about a guy that owed thousands in rent and was on fraud charges. Then said make up your own mind. I don't remember anywhere that Bones said the persons were one and the same. I don't see why we should have to kowtow to a suppression order from the court on a football forum. the more people know of this evil pricks real identity, the better chance those kids will have .

I would disagree about it being an over-reaction. I didn't see what was put up or edit the post, but the thinking behind it is sound. Dan, as owner, doesn't have the financial or time resources to get caught up in a legal stoush. Having been through a couple of these it can turn a life upside down. I agree with your end sentiment about the kids but I can't support jeopardising the site. Feel free to put it up on your FB account if you want 🙂