Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King
A judge has warned a jury not be prejudiced against a Wellington man because of the number of sexual assault charges he faces.
The 25-year-old man, who has name suppression, has pleaded not guilty to four charges of rape, two of unlawful sexual connection and two of indecent assault.
The jury has retired from deliberations for the long weekend and will begin deliberating again on Tuesday at 9am.
Judge Andrew Becroft summed up the case today.
He said the jury must decide if the Crown had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that for each of the rape charges the woman did not consent to the sexual activity.
They must also decide if the defendant knew, and a reasonable person would come to the same conclusion, that they were not consenting.
On the unlawful sexual connection and indecent assault charges the jury must decide whether the Crown has proved the alleged crimes were committed by the defendant at all.
The defence says he did not touch them.
Judge Becroft said the onus was completely on the Crown to prove all eight charges individually beyond reasonable doubt although he later gave the jury direction as to how to treat what the Crown said was a pattern of behaviour by the defendant.
He said essentially there were eight trials under way simultaneously.
"It is not enough for the Crown to persuade you that the accused is probably guilty or even that he is very likely guilty."
He said the jury could be prejudiced against the defendant because of the "sheer number" of separate charges he faced.
"Remember, the volume of allegations do not equate with guilt. And neither should the number of charges prejudice you're against the defendant."
He said there were different, specific and nuanced facts at play for each of the rape charges.
"You cannot say that because the [the defendant] has been involved [allegedly] in one or more instances of sexual misconduct he must therefore must be guilty of all of all of them.
"Or worse, while we're not sure of guilt of any of them separately he must be guilty by weight of numbers, that's a risk and you must guard against.
"I repeat, each charge must be considered individually and a verdict delivered in respect of each charge."
Judge's direction on how to evaluate alleged pattern of offending
The Judge said there was one variation to the principle of considering each charge separately.
He said it pertained to the argument by the Crown that there was a pattern of offending which it argued made it more likely he committed the offences.
Judge Becroft said by his count there were 13 similarities between all the cases.
These included that:
- The complainants all knew the defendant to some degree
- None had a previous sexual relationship with the defendant
- They had all been drinking and/or taking drugs
- They had all gone to bed in a dwelling where the defendant was also sleeping over
- That they were all asleep or near asleep
- The manner in which the assaults were alleged to occur all began in a similar way
- That the sex was aggressive, forceful or persistent.
Judge Becroft said the jury must be satisfied that this constituted a pattern, that there was no collusion among the complainants, and that that they have not been "unwittingly or otherwise" influenced by posts on social media.
He described how some of the women did and didn't know each other, and that the defence did not suggest, in its cross examination, that the complainants had colluded.
He said the defence pointed out that there was a delay between when the alleged offending happened and when the complainants came forward, and that news and social media posts may have coloured or influenced their testimony.
But he said the Crown contended the posts prompted the complaints, but did not influence their testimony.
Becroft said some of the complainants had told other people about incidents involving the defendant soon after the event.
Late complaint 'does not signify a false complaint' - judge
Judge Becroft told the jury there may be good reasons for a complainant delaying making a complaint.
"Research shows that victims of sexual offences react to the trauma in different ways, some in distress or anger may complain to the first person they see.
"Others react with shame or fear or shock or confusion and do not complain or go to the authorities for some time.
"There is no classic or typical response.
"A late or later complaint does not signify a false complaint any more than an immediate complaint necessarily demonstrates a true complaint."
Credibility of parties at core of case
The judge said the jury must come to verdicts solely on the evidence heard in court, not on any news or social media reports before or during the trail.
Judge Becroft said the real issues in this trial were about credibility and reliability.
"And here, for instance, you will have to decide the extent to which the varying degrees of intoxication of all the complainants and the defendant has affected their memory, and how accurate and reliable the evidence is."
The judge took talked the jury through the evidence in each charge.
"To break the case back down to its component parts looking at each charge and each element of the charge only then can we be sure that you render individual verdicts that are sound."
He gave them a "question trail" to help them come to decisions.
