Man who beat wife so badly motorist called 111 has appeal dismissed

A man convicted of assaulting his wife has had his appeal dismissed. Photo / File

A man who beat up his pregnant wife and was arrested at the airport when he arrived back in the country from a holiday has had his appeal dismissed.

A jury found the man guilty on four charges of assault and one of threatening to kill his new wife in December 2016 and he was later sentenced to 20 months' imprisonment.

The man was convicted of five charges including punching his wife so badly that a member of the public following in his car called 111. He repeatedly punched the woman on her shoulder and grabbed her hair as they travelled along the motorway.

In another incident he grabbed his wife's nose and twisted it in his hand leaving a visible bruise.

He was also convicted of assault when he hugged her with force while she was sick and pregnant and yanking her hair down causing significant pain.

The woman had also fled to a friend's home after he threatened to kill her.

The woman complained to police about the extensive abuse and when they returned from overseas her husband was arrested at the airport. He faced 24 charges, but was only found guilty of five.

The man's lawyer, Paul Borich, appealed the decision arguing that aspects of cross-examination of the victim were wrong and that Judge Ronayne should not have allowed the prosecutor to ask the defendant about why he had pleaded guilty or use incorrect statements of law in his closing.

In a decision released by the Court of Appeal today, Justice Rebecca Ellis said that although there were errors in how the trial was conducted including the Judge allowing the prosecutor to make "wrong and prejudicial" remarks, she did not believe it would have had an affect on the verdict or result in the errors not being made. The judge also dismissed the appeal for the length of sentence being too long.

Ellis acknowledged that the victim was a difficult witness to cross-examine which was amplified by the fact she was giving it by AVL so could not see the judge while she gave evidence.