Rape Charges – Not Guilty by Jury

The accused was a 30 year old man charged with raping a woman he had met on a dating website.

What is alleged to have occured?
They had been on several dates and had had consensual penile-vaginal sex on one occasion prior. They had also discussed, over text message and in conversation, anal sex and the fact that the complainant would not consent to anal sex unless she was in a long-term relationship.

On the night of the alleged offending, the couple had been to the movies and returned to the accused’s house to have sex; both had been drinking alcohol. During the course of penile-vaginal sex, while the complainant was on her hands and knees, the accused’s penis pushed against her anus on two occasions before partially penetrating her anus. Following each of the two occasions of pushing’ against her anus, the couple resumed penile-vaginal sex.

The accused was charged with two counts of attempted rape (the two episodes of pushing against’ the complainant’s anus) and rape. The accused always maintained that it was an accident, and pleaded not guilty, running a trial on that basis.

What happened at court?
We represented the client at the Melbourne County Court.

The complainant gave evidence at the trial that the accused did not thrust his penis while it was in her anus on the third occasion and that that occasion of penetration did not last long.

The defence submitted that the sexual position the couple were in, combined with the fact that they were not overly familiar with each other’s bodies and that they were intoxicated meant that the jury could not reasonably exclude the possibility that the attempted penetration and penetration were accidental.

What was the result?
The jury agreed, finding the accused not guilty and acquitting him of all 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