A Judge has found a Christchurch businessman not guilty of indecently assaulting a female employee. Photo / George Heard
A Judge has found a Christchurch businessman not guilty of indecently assaulting a female employee. Photo / George Heard
A Christchurch businessman has been acquitted on three charges of indecently assaulting a female employee and he has won his fight to keep his name and details secret forever.
The case has been before the courts for more than a year but can only now be reported after a judge found the man not guilty on all charges and granted permanent name suppression for both him and his business.
The man was accused of indecently assaulting the employee by kissing her on the mouth, placing her hand on his crotch and kissing her neck.
He denied the accusation, saying it was the woman who "endeavoured to kiss him, and she put her hand on his shorts".
"She said it was all very confrontational from there. She said that as [the man] shut the door behind her he put his hand around her neck and pulled her in for a kiss.
"She said that then he dragged her hand and shoved it down his pants and she could feel what she was touching."
She claimed the man grabbed her and kissed her again just after they left the room.
He was then "persistent" and eventually "aggressive" as he tried to persuade her to perform further sexual acts.
"It was about to get to the point where I think he was about to grab me," she told the court.
She said she felt "disgusted and shocked".
A Christchurch woman accused her boss of indecently assaulting her, saying she was shocked and disgusted by him. A judge found him not guilty. Photo / 123RF stock image
Another female employee approached the pair and started chatting.
The complainant said she eventually managed to excuse herself from the conversation and "got into her car and left as fast as she could".
She went straight home and told her partner what had happened at work - and then reported the alleged incident to the police.
The businessman was arrested the next day and in a lengthy police interview, said the complainant was the one who initiated the contact.
At the trial Judge Kellar heard evidence from the complainant directly as well as what she told police.
He also heard from the businessman and several witnesses who cannot be identified.
He was also provided with CCTV footage.
While the cameras did not cover the area where the woman said the assault happened, it captured the pair immediately before and after the alleged incident.
Judge Kellar said nothing looked amiss beforehand and after the complainant "appears to be smiling and laughing".
That was "at odds" with her evidence that she "felt disgusted and shocked".
"She is making eye contact with [the man] and appears to have a huge smile on her face," he said.
"[She] appears to be looking at him smiling and laughing."
Police arrested the man last January and his case has been before the court since then. Last week a judge found him not guilty and suppressed his details forever. Photo / NZME
Judge Kellar was "very mindful" of the dynamic between the businessman and his younger employee.
He said he must also "exercise great caution" in placing weight on how the complainant appeared on the CCTV footage because "people do not always react the way one would expect" after an indecent assault.
However, he said the CCTV footage "appears to be inconsistent with what [the woman] says happened and how she was feeling at the time".
After considering all of the evidence presented at trial, Judge Kellar ruled that the Crown had not satisfied him beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was a "reliable and credible witness".
"There was a disconnect in several material respects between what she told police, what she said in evidence-in-chief, what she said in cross-examination, and the objective evidence of the CCTV footage," he said.
"The CCTV footage paints quite a different picture to what [the woman] described in several material respects."
Judge Kellar said while the alleged incident was not filmed, what happened before and after was captured on camera and was "markedly at odds" with what the complainant told the court.
"Her evidence leaves me with a reasonable doubt as to [the businessman's] guilt," he said.
"In any event, I cannot exclude what [he] told police as being a reasonable possibility… there is a remarkable similarity between what he told the police and what the CCTV footage shows.
"Furthermore… I cannot exclude his account of what happened in the [room] as being a reasonable possibility."
