Stewart Case updates - no speculation please

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks DSM great coverage...Should get you some applauds Iwould think
 
Correct Matas.  I originally thought that this case was a crock, and as it goes on, imo it's turning out to be one.  Remember that these witnesses we are hearing from now are the Crown's, and yet there's no smoking gun, only the ramblings of a disturbed individual, the rantings of a dad with a dodgy background, and contradictions over who said what to whom.  The 'intoxication' stuff would appear to have been demolished.  In my view Brett won't take the stand, and Bellanto is working up a very solid base for the denial that this alleged event took place.  
 
If this is the best that can be presented, the judge who decided there was a case to answer at the commital hearings really ought to be sacked. 
 
The doctor's testimony from RNSH sexual assault unit will be after the cops next week.  My guess is that the Crown are hanging on to the red mark around the below the belt region to substantiate the 3rd allegation.  The bruise on the arm could have been anything as could be the red mark.  From the preliminaries outlined by both camps on Monday, there will be a lot of expert testimony from both regarding the mark.  I think the cops, the girl's psychiatrist and the RNSH doctor are all the Crown have to go.       
 
I've just read about Brett breaking down on the 9 website.  This was in relation to the Marrin testimony at the end of the day.  She had a little weep while giving it, and I must admit it brought a tear to my hardened eye.  Brett is standing up to this constant barrage of crap quite well.  He carries himself well all day, and stands when the jury come in and looks tense, but in control.  It must be hell listening to all the rubbish. 
 
This sort of thing is enough to have a massive impact on a person, his relationships, his family and friends. He will be doing it tough!!
 
Monday
Still the Crowns case.  I believe they have 26 witnesses to get through.  Another three days of it I've heard until the Defense calls.  This may prove to be hard day for Brett as it contains the Police evidence.
OK
The first witness was the neighbour's wife.  She stated she saw the dad pushing and shoving Brett.  At no times did she hear the word 'bro' uttered by Brett.  (important as the dad and mum have said this word was continually used by Brett) She is a Kiwi and would know she said, as it's commonly used in NZ.  She described how Brett was being yelled at and being defensive.  (weird I thoght for the Crown to use her as I thought she was good for Brett)

Second witness - The complainant's sister.  She was rung by the complainant on the night and had the complainant tell her basically what she has claimed Brett did.
No cross by Bellanto

Witness 3 - cop 1
The Crown went through her statement about getting the call out and attending.  Talking to dad and the girl.  She made the observation that the girl didn't look visibly upset.  She went ouside and met Brett and stated his breath smelt of liquor and he was unsteady on his feet.  She said that Brett had said, "What do I do"? (important)
Bellanto cross examination - The statement was recorded 8 hours after the incident and could Brett have said, "What did I do"?  The cop conceded that he could have said that.

Witness 4 - cop 2
Crown went through his statement which was completed on the 18th, almost twelve days after the incident.  He said that he felt that Brett was intoxicated and then said he talked to Brett about footie and club issues for about 15 minutes.
Bellanto cross examined -
Was Brett polite?  cop, "yes".  Was Brett conversing intelligently? cop "yes".

Witness 5 - Cop 3
Crown went through his statement.  He said that Brett appeared intoxicated.  He was told to arrest Brett which he did.  Brett's comment on being arrested was, "what 's the allegation"?  Brett alxo said "what do I do"?  Brett asked to get some stuff for his diabetes and the cop went with him upstairs.  At no time did he leave his vision.  Brett was cooperative and polite.  The cop then said he took the girl to RNSH and he observed her laughing and in good spirits in the  police car on the way to hospital. 
Bellanto cross - "So the girl was laughing and in good spirits"?  cop "yes".
Could Brett have said, "What did I do"? instead of "what do I do?  cop, "yes".

Witness 6 - cop 4 (supervising sergeant)
She claimed that Brett was in her opinion, moderately intoxicated.  Brett asked her, "Can you tell me what I've done"?  and asked if he could take a phone and make a call.
She took photos of the area of the incident, the gate etc (this gate is important as the girl claimed it was self locking)
The gate was open when the photos were taken. The cop claimed to not recall whether it was open or shut when she got there, although she said she walked through that gate to gain entry to the complex. 
This cop made a second statement nearly twelve days later at the behest of the detectives in which she said that the dad was talking over the girl and interrupting when she  was attempting to take a statement from her at the time.  Being over-bearing?, asked Bellanto.  cop, "yes".
 
Afternoon.  There's a lot of down time in this.

Witness 7.  Cop - 5  Custody Sergeant Dee Why.
He observed Brett and judged him to be 'moderately intoxicated'.  Time in 9.09pm, released about 2.30am. No charge.
He said that Brett went to the toilet twice, but said that police procedure is to observe people in custody at all times (tell that to all aboriginals in custody).  Anyway, the Crown attempted, by introducing the fact that Brett went to the toilet, the inference that he could have washed his hands.
Bellanto counted by taking the cop through the duties and procedures of people in custody.

Witness 8.  Cop - 6.  Detective someone (who looked like he was about 18)
This detective thought Brett was sober enough to interview.  By this time Geoff Bellew was in attendance.  The Crown played a DVD of the interview.  Brett looked a little disheveled, but he'd been up for almost 20 hours.  Brett agreed to swabs being taken from his mouth and fingers, no problem even when advised of his right to decline.  Bellew advised him not to make a statement which is his right (The jury were told that by the judge).  They left the Police Station.

Witness 9.  Cop - 7.  Lead detective.
The girl was re-interviewed.  He got all the CCCTV footage from various hotels and bars around the Corso of the night.  On the 10th Brett re-arrested and charged.  No statement given. 
Bellanto cross examination.  "Would you consider the DNA connection between the complainant and the accused is a PRIMARY source for investigation"?  detective, Yes.

As you can see it finished early.  David Williams attended court all day, much to the interest of a couple of jury members and others.  The  Crown will call another cop tomorrow, who couldn't be there today, three doctors, two from the RNSH and the Psychiatrist.  This will conclude the Crown case.  Prediction is that the Crown will finish either tomorrow afternoon, or lunchtime Wednesday.  The the Defense gets to kick off. 
 
No, not that I thought.  The cops were typically self serving enough to consider the guy intoxicated.  Exhausted and in need of a shower, a meal and a kip, and probably needing medication, as I would have described him.  Anyway doctors at twenty paces tomorrow followed by the psych.  A medical day.  On that matter one of my girls went out with a diabetic who didn't have his medication under control for a time.  Then, I would have described him as intoxicated, if I wasn't aware of his condition.  Luckily she dumped him as he was a Tigers supporter.
 
To all, Please dont post these on other sites
 
I'm in complete agreement with Dan on this.  The idea for 'silvertails' supporters is to encourage people to view THIS site and so build up Dan's, and the site's profile.  I love my club and strangely, this site.   
 
Dan link said:
aww and I love you too DSM :)

You forgot to add a few of these  :-* at the end of your return love post Dan.
 
I don't remember professing my love for Dan.  It's the site stupid.  Jethro, I must admit your lessons of 'of' and 'off' have been most beneficial.  I hope you've noticed.
 
DSM5 link said:
I don't remember professing my love for Dan.  It's the site stupid.  Jethro, I must admit your lessons of 'of' and 'off' have been most beneficial.  I hope you've noticed.

I know what you said, and I also know what you meant
 
DSM5 link said:
I don't remember professing my love for Dan.  It's the site stupid.  Jethro, I must admit your lessons of 'of' and 'off' have been most beneficial.  I hope you've noticed.

:D Yes I have noticed since I helped you out with that differentiation all those months ago but you do still slip up occasionally but we all do that with things sometimes :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom