Kristina Kothrakis
This is a real case study by one of our lawyers. The person who is in charge of this area in the firm is Kristina Kothrakis. Kristina is a Director and LIV Accredited Criminal Law Specialist at Doogue + George, recognised by Doyle's Guide as a Leading Criminal Defence Lawyer in Victoria (2026). With over 18 years of experience, she acts in sexual offences, family violence, white collar crime, fraud, and ASIC and IBAC investigations.
View full profile →This is a case study on rape and intentionally causing injury at the Melbourne County Court, where the defendant was found not guilty on all charges.
The accused was married to the complainant for over 20 years. The allegations were made to police following their separation in 2006, and were said to have occurred during the course of their marriage. They relate to incidents spanning from 1986- 2004.
What is alleged to have occured?
The complainant alleged that the accused would force her to have sex with him, and would use violence if she resisted. She asserted that her injuries were witnessed by her children, and that she had complained to them over the years.
Our client, the accused, was charged with the following:
- Rape
- Intentionally cause injury
- Threat to kill
- Unlawful imprisonment
What happened at court?
Kristina Kothrakis represented him at the Melbourne County Court.
A contested committal was conducted in the Magistrates’ Court, where the complainant was cross-examined. During the Trial in the County Court, the complainant was again cross-examined extensively. She provided inconsistent answers at the Trial, to the answers given at the committal. She poorly deflected questions directed towards her motive to lie. She did not appear to be a credible witness. Cross-examination was also conducted of her some of her children, who either provided inconsistent accounts, or contradicted the complainant’s account completely. It was put to the jury, that with all the discrepancies and inconsistencies, they could not be satisfied of the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
What was the result?
The defendant was found not guilty of all the charges.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 25/02/2013
