Adelaide magistrate declines to finalise drink-driving case of Adelaide Crows footballer Tyson Stengle until he attends court
Young Crows forward Tyson Stengle missed his drink-driving court hearing because he didn’t want to breach AFL quarantine rules. He plans to plead guilty but a magistrate refused to finalise the case until the footballer stands before him.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
An Adelaide magistrate says he will not finalise Crows footballer Tyson Stengle’s drink-driving case until the young gun forward attends court in person.
His lawyers, however, have stressed the non-appearance is not a sign of disrespect for the court – but of close adherence to the AFL’s anti-pandemic rules.
Stengle, 21, of North Haven, was reported for drink-driving and driving unregistered following a traffic stop at Morphettville in the early hours of April 9.
SA Police allege Stengle was asked to pull over after he was spotted driving an unregistered car – the vehicle was not his, and he had a passenger.
They further allege he recorded a blood-alcohol reading of 0.125 – more than twice the legal limit – resulting in an on-the-spot cancellation of his licence.
The vehicle was impounded and, following the incident, the Crows said Stengle would be subject to club-imposed sanctions as well.
Stengle was due to make his first appearance in the Adelaide Magistrates Court on Monday, but did not attend.
Under state law, a person charged with drink-driving does not have to attend court in person and can ask the case be heard in their absence as long as they are represented by a lawyer.
Stengle’s lawyer asked the court for leave to enter a plea on the footballer’s behalf, make submissions as to penalty and have the case finalised.
Magistrate David McLeod declined to do so.
“I can take the plea but I cannot accept submissions in Stengle’s absence … he will need to be here,” he said.
Stengle’s lawyers asked the entire matter be adjourned so they could seek further instructions from their client.
Mr McLeod agreed, remanded the matter until October.
In a statement outside court, WRP Legal director Dimitris Parhas said Stengle “is treating this matter very seriously and sincerely regrets his actions”.
“We were ready to plead today, but as you know the AFL hub rules are very strict,” he said.
“We decided to take a conservative approach to ensure that Tyson did not breach those rules by attending court and then returning to the footy club.”
He said the consequences of such a breach would have included Stengle being required to complete a 14-day quarantine period.
That would leave him ineligible to play in upcoming rounds.
“On that basis, we advised the prosecution we intended to plead in Tyson’s absence if the magistrate was prepared to hear submissions on this basis,” he said.
“The prosecution did not oppose this course, however as he is entitled to, the magistrate decided that Tyson needed to be in court. The matter has been adjourned and we look forward to finalising the matter at the next hearing.”