A high-profile Sydney man lied to the police with a guilty conscience after he allegedly threatened to distribute an intimate video of a woman, a prosecutor has alleged.
The crown prosecutor Adrian Robertson on Thursday concluded his closing argument in a sexual assault trial at Sydney’s Downing Centre expected to wrap up this week. Robertson told the court how the woman’s boyfriend had allegedly gone to the man’s home to retrieve the intimate video after he threatened to distribute it.
The man then reported to the police that the boyfriend had “forced” his way into his home, the court heard. When asked what it was “all over”, he told police: “I really don’t have any ideas … I used to have relations with the girl he is seeing now and she has always been a bit … psycho as far as being interested in me.”
Robertson said if the jury accepted the accused did threaten to distribute an intimate video, which is one of the nine charges the man is facing, then it was a “lie” and was told “with a consciousness of guilt”.
The man, who Guardian Australia cannot name due to a suppression order, is facing trial after pleading not guilty to nine charges – including five counts of rape – alleged to have occurred over a six-year period against five women on separate occasions.
The crown argued the man had a tendency to carry out sexual conduct with usually much younger women, knowing that they did not consent or that he was reckless to their consent.
The man’s defence argued he did have sex with the four women who have alleged he raped them, but that it was consensual, “not in the circumstances alleged by the crown”, and that the complainants “admired the accused, even idolised him”.
In February 2020, two years after complainant five and the accused had last had contact, the accused messaged the complainant saying “remember when” her boyfriend came over to his home and “you apparently told him I had raped you and that you wanted me to delete that film we all made … You know I never raped you right? I really hope you don’t actually think that happened.”
Robertson told the court the message came “some weeks” after the complainant had made her first formal statement to police.
“It’s curious, might you think, that some two years later he’s contacted her and asked about this very question and we say it’s because, one, he’s concerned, and secondly that he was trying to get her to say something which he thought might help him,” Robertson said.
Complainant five, who had a friendship with the accused that was sometimes intimate, also alleged the accused raped her. The defence has argued that no sexual encounter occurred on the night she alleges she was raped.
Robertson, in his closing argument, said the crown was relying on the accused having knowledge of the fact she did not consent, or that he was reckless to it. The complainant had told the court she did not verbally communicate she did not want to have sex, but Robertson argued she communicated by trying to get off the bed.
On Thursday, the accused’s defence counsel, David Scully SC, began his closing argument.
“This is not a court of morals, this is not a court of public opinion … this is not the Surry Hills rumours or gossip court,” he told the court. “This is a criminal court and the crown brings very serious charges.”
Scully turned to complainant one’s allegations that the accused raped her while she was his intern, and shortly before he had asked her to catalogue sex tapes of the accused and his ex-wife.
Scully argued it was “utterly unrealistic” that the accused asked her to catalogue sex tapes, given there was a family member of the accused’s in the room at the time. And that for this reason, it was also “inherently improbable” the accused sexually assaulted her because there was a risk the family member would “hear”.
He also argued the complainant had added “details” in her evidence to make it sound more non-consensual. Specifically, that she had pulled away and he had put his arm around her to pull her back.
“Not great behaviour by the accused to have sex with your intern … but this is not a court of morals … this is a criminal court,” Scully said.
Scully argued she had not been “forthcoming” and “pushed forward a false narrative [and] a misleading picture of the true relationship between her and the accused”. Scully pointed out the complainant deleted messages after the accused was arrested and withheld them from the police. He read out one message that said: “Call me soon, I miss you.”
Scully also said the complainant, who alleged the accused raped her a second time but the incident does not form part of the charges, was “constantly shifting and changing her version about this incident”.
In her first statement to police, she said he had allegedly raped her after she went into another room to try on a costume. But then after it was revealed there was a video of her wearing the costume where she was “happy” and “smiling”, she alleged the rape occurred after she went to take off the costume, the court heard.
“It is proved a plain and utter lie,” Scully said.
Earlier on Thursday, Robertson ended his closing argument speaking about complainant four’s allegations. The accused is facing two counts of rape alleged to have occurred during the same sexual encounter with the complainant.
The defence agreed that there was a sexual encounter, but said it was consensual. Robertson, in his closing argument, argued the accused had knowledge she did not consent or was reckless to it, after the complainant had told him she had her period and “didn’t want to do anything”.
Robertson said it was possible there “might have been some kissing” and “moaning” from the complainant but it was possible that happened in a “dissociated state”.
