A Taranaki businessman has been found guilty of raping a woman on two occassions. Photo / Stock Image
A Taranaki businessman has been found guilty of raping a woman on two occassions. Photo / Stock Image
WARNING: This story discusses rape and sexual assault and may be distressing for some readers.
A businessman accused of a series of sexual assaults on a woman after he became caught up in protest action and stopped taking his medication, causing a shift in his personality, has been found guilty on two counts of rape.
The Taranaki man was also found guilty on one charge of sexual violation by unlawful connection but was acquitted on seven counts of indecent assault, three of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, attempted sexual violation and one further count of rape.
On Friday afternoon, the verdicts were read aloud in New Plymouth District Court by the jury’s foreperson as the man, who has interim name suppression, stood in the dock, with his eyes cast ahead.
He let out a breath once the outcome of all 15 charges was heard.
The man’s offending against the woman, who was known to him, happened at a time when he had become obsessed with opposing the Government’s Covid-19 mandates, in January 2022.
The jury heard he had become “arrogant and disrespectful” and that his behaviour grew “crazy” as he launched himself into an anti-mandate crusade and stopped taking pain medication for a significant injury he had suffered.
He began threatening, manipulating and controlling the woman, before going on to sexually assault her.
The verdicts came following a week of evidence and after the Crown and the defence teams gave their closing submissions yesterday.
Judge Tony Greig thanked the jurors for their commitment to the trial before dismissing them.
He then ordered a presentence report, referred the matter to restorative justice and remanded the man back into custody ahead of his sentencing on January 24.
Some details of the case cannot be reported because of suppression issues yet to be determined.
Yesterday, the jury was told by Crown prosecutor Cherie Clarke that the man had stalked the woman and attempted to control her in various ways.
Ultimately, he wanted to control the use of her body, Clark said in her closing statements.
The trial took place in New Plymouth District Court. Photo / Tara Shaskey
But “clearly” she had not consented to his sexual advances, Clarke said. The woman would push him away, tell him “no”, to “stop” and that she was in pain.
“He didn’t listen to any of that. He just went on and did what he wanted.”
On the evidence, Clarke said the man could not have had an honest belief the woman was consenting.
She was vulnerable and the man himself had described her as “innocent and naive”.
He went on to lie in his police interview and display controlling behaviour in his interactions with officers, she said.
Clarke pointed to evidence that showed the man “did not listen” if he did not want to.
“That is indicative of his attitude.”
Defence lawyer Nathan Bourke, however, told the jury the Crown case was “scattered and incomprehensible” and had fallen “woefully short of the mark” in proving the charges.
“What exactly was she saying as [the man] allegedly sexually assaulted her? What exactly was she doing? How did it take place? What time did it take place?,” Bourke asked in his closing submissions.
“By and large, these questions remain unanswered.”
The victim was facing adversities and when she sought help, she did not get the result she wanted, Bourke said.
That was when she made the allegations against the man, who she believed had been controlling the situation.
Bourke said the details the complainant gave of the sexual assaults were “all bullshit” and had a “ring of cliche”.
The defence case was that sexual activity did take place between the pair but on every occasion it was consensual.
“If you have sex with someone and they consent to it, even reluctantly, then no crime has been committed.”
Bourke said the victim’s evidence had actually proven she did not tell the defendant “no”.
The only reluctance was in her own mind, which the man was not aware of, Bourke told the jury.
He had a reasonable belief that she was consenting, Bourke said.
While it was clear his client had got “really caught up” in the anti-mandate movement and had lost perspective, Bourke reminded the jury it needed to put prejudice to one side.
Tara Shaskey joined NZME in 2022 as a news director and Open Justice reporter. She has been a reporter since 2014 and previously worked at Stuff where she covered crime and justice, arts and entertainment, and Māori issues.
