Final submissions have been made in a County Court trial of an Alfredton man who allegedly imprisoned his former partner, raping and threatening to kill her.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The 12-person jury retired on late Monday afternoon to consider the evidence in the criminal trial, which included photographs, interviews with the accused man and complainant, and witness testimony.
The man, who The Courier has decided not to name to protect the identity of the victim, has been charged with nine offences relating to incidents in February, May to June and September, 2017.
The man has pleaded not guilty to two counts of false imprisonment and one count each of perverting the course of justice, kidnapping, making a threat to kill and rape. He has already pleaded guilty to three counts of intentionally causing injury.
In his closing argument, prosecution barrister Bill Storgiannos said the complainant was a reliable witness who “didn’t embellish” in her testimony, and could not have possibly consented to sex with the man.
“How could he reasonably believe someone who was asleep, who he had bashed to a pulp with a weapon in part, could be consenting?” he told the jury.
Storgiannos noted the jury had seen a series of photos “injuries all over the body of this woman”, which would suggest any threats made by the accused would not have been taken lightly.
“The threat to kill he made was not an idle threat, it was intended to cause apprehension that it would happen to her, and it was confirmed by the vicious beating he gave her.”
Defence barrister Ian Polak noted in his closing statement the complainant did not disclose the alleged rape to neighbours when she told them about the assault on September 9, and it wasn’t until much later she told a nurse about vaginal pain, arguing that rape is “something you wouldn't forget or get wrong”.
“It’s a matter of competing stories, there’s too many versions, too many complications, and too much unreliability,” he said.
Mr Polak said the charge of false imprisonment could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and she “could have left at any stage”.
“Allegations of padlocks on the doors is simply not supported by witnesses or photos … there’s no evidence she's locked in the house.”
In giving his final directions to the jury, Judge Frank Gucciardo said “starkly contrasting views” about the relationship between the accused and complainant had been presented in court.
He said while the prosecution’s contention was that there was a “clear power imbalance”, where the victim was a “caring, damaged woman", defence barrister had argued the complainant was a “jealous woman who threatened and manipulated” the accused.
“Cases such as these involve serious allegations of sexual offences and violent offences, and they create instinctive responses in us naturally enough. But you must dispassionately weigh the evidence with an open mind,” Judge Gucciardo said.
The jury previously heard a five minute emergency assistance recording, where the victim was heard in the background, while the witness told the call-taker the victim’s face was covered in blood, she couldn’t open her eyes and she escaped the accused’s house when he went to the supermarket. The jury will return to deliberate in the trial on Tuesday.
