2 weeks Ago By The Guardian
A high-profile Sydney man has been found not guilty on two counts of rape, with a jury unable to reach a verdict on three other rape charges. The man was found not guilty on four out of a total nine charges. After 12 days of deliberation, the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the remaining five charges, which included three counts of rape against three separate women.
The man could now face a second trial on those charges. Guardian Australian cannot name the man due to a suppression order on his identity. This order was due to lift once a verdict was returned on all charges, but because the jury failed to reach a majority on five charges, it remains in place.
The jury – made up of nine men and three women – delivered the verdict on Friday after a six week trial at Sydney’s Downing Centre district court. The man pleaded not guilty to nine charges for offences alleged to have occurred over a six-year period against five women on separate occasions. The man was found not guilty of the allegations of three of the women.
The not guilty verdicts were returned against allegations he indecently assaulted a 21-year-old woman after he allegedly touched her bare breast; allegedly raping and occasioning bodily harm against a woman, when she was 19 and he in his mid-30s; and allegedly raping another woman when she was 21. For the remaining two complainants and one of the two charges alleged by another, the jury was unable to reach a verdict. One of those who alleged the man raped her was undertaking a two-month long internship with him.
The crown prosecutor Adrian Robertson alleged the man knew his intern – at the time 19 and he in his mid-30s – did not consent to the sex because “amongst other things” she had told him she did not consent. The man’s defence counsel, David Scully SC, said inconsistencies in the woman’s statements to police and evidence showed her “constantly shifting” and changing her version of the incident. He also argued the complainant added “details” in her evidence to make it sound more non-consensual, and questioned their ongoing friendship after the alleged rape.
Another woman, known as complainant four, alleged the man raped her twice during a single sexual encounter. She had flown interstate to visit him and alleged he raped her after she told him she had her period and “didn’t want to do anything”. Under questioning from the defence, the woman said it was possible there “might have been some kissing” and “moaning” from her but that might have happened in a “dissociated state”.
Scully argued the complainant had became heartbroken during the trip when he started showing attention to other women. The final complainant the jury could not come to a verdict on alleged the man raped her, and on a separate occasion alleged he grabbed her by the throat. He was also charged with threatening to distribute an intimate video of her.
The court heard the complainant had a friendship with the man that was sometimes intimate. She alleged he raped her when she was aged 29, after he picked her up from a party and took her to his home. On a later occasion, she alleged the man grabbed her by the throat after he became “annoyed” at her.
She told the court that after she told a friend about the assaults, he had threatened to distribute an intimate video of her. Scully said the jury “might think” of two themes relating to complainant five: “obsession with the accused and drama”. He told the court that the complainant’s version of events was “improbable to the point of absurdity”.
The defence argued no sexual encounter occurred at all and that she lied. On the alleged choking incident, Scully told the court that this was a lie. On the twelfth day of trying to reach a verdict, the jury sent a note to Judge Jane Culver on Friday saying it had “reached severe impasse” on coming to a majority verdict on those five charges, and further progress seemed “impossible”.
Guardian Australia understands if the man is to face a second trial on the five charges, it may not take place for another year. The crown had argued the man had a tendency to carry out sexual conduct with usually much younger women, knowing they did not consent or was reckless to their consent. The man’s defence had argued that the sex with four women who allege he raped them was consensual, “not in the circumstances alleged by the crown”, and that the complainants “admired the accused, even idolised him”.
During the trial, the five complainants fronted the court to give evidence..
