The Court: Geelong Magistrates Court
The Lawyer: Ryan Robertson
The Charges:
The Allegations:
It was alleged that whilst playing pool at a family barbecue, the client had inappropriately touched his niece, the complainant. It was further alleged that later that day, he took her to an upstairs bedroom, tried to forcibly kiss her on the lips and groped her on the bed.
The allegations were not the most serious example of this type of offending. Still, they had severe ramifications, such as being registered as a sex offender, having a criminal record for sex offending against a child, and potentially receiving a custodial sentence.
At Court:
As is always the case with allegations of this nature, the devil is in the details.
The client’s record of interview was excellent. Initially, he genuinely appeared to be confused by the allegations. Furthermore, he made the appropriate concessions, acknowledging that he had been showing his niece how to play pool (at her request) and accepted, under those circumstances, that there may have been touching. He stated, however, that it was not sexual and occurred in innocent circumstances.
When asked about the second incident, he made it plain that it never happened and was fairly animated in his denials. The advantage of a good record of interview concerning dated sex offending cannot be overstated. This recorded interview was sufficient to ensure that the client would not have to be called to give evidence.
The evidence of the complaint was deficient. It was accepted by both witnesses that disclosures had been made, but only in relation to the playing pool incident. No complaint had been made to these witnesses regarding the more serious allegations. This, in turn, harmed the complainant’s credibility.
Following receipt of further disclosure by the police, it was revealed that the complainant’s mother was claiming that the accused had committed sexual offences against others. The police notes revealed that this was untrue, and in fact, some of the people who it was claimed the accused had sexually assaulted spoke highly of the accused’s character. This made the complainant’s mother appear biased in terms of her evidence.
The surrounding circumstances made the allegations unlikely to be true, given that they occurred at a crowded family barbecue. The client wanted to contest the charges as he vehemently denied the allegations. The matter was therefore booked in for a two-day contested hearing.
Following extensive cross-examination at the contested hearing of the informant (the charging police officer), it was revealed that the police investigation of the matter was flawed. Many witnesses were not interviewed, and it appeared that police had taken a very ‘tunnel visioned’ approach to both the investigation and the prosecution.
Our client had no prior history and was able to rely on his good character and the testimony of other character witnesses.
The Outcome:
Following the conclusion of the hearing, the Magistrate found the client not guilty of the charges, and he was acquitted. The Magistrate also ordered costs against the police.
Unfortunately, like most sex offence cases, it was a long, drawn-out process. There were case conferences, contest mentions, special mentions and then a two-day contested hearing.
