John Kakule has rape conviction overturned on appeal

A married Mount Gambier man convicted of rape has successfully appealed his conviction and will be retried. Find out why.

A dental technician has had his conviction for allegedly raping a woman overturned and will now face a retrial.

John Kakule, 46, was found guilty by a jury in the District Court last year of assault with intent to rape, indecent assault and rape.

The prosecution alleged Mr Kakule drove the woman to a secluded area in 2019 and allegedly attempted to have sex with her without her consent.

The Crown claimed a couple of days later Mr Kakule pinned the woman’s arms behind her, pushed her down and raped her.

John Kakule has had a rape conviction overturned on appeal. Picture: Facebook

The Court of Appeal comprising President Mark Livesey and Justices Chris Bleby and Sophie David allowed an appeal against Mr Kakule’s conviction on Thursday.

In their published reasons, Justices Livesey, Bleby and David said when Mr Kakule was interviewed by police about the alleged rape he gave them a notebook with notes about his version of the events.
The notes said that the alleged victim had initiated the sexual contact with Mr Kakule and that she “could not control or contain herself anymore for she badly wanted to have sex with (him)”.

“The prosecution case with respect to the notes was that (Mr Kakule) had prepared the notes in order to characterise, falsely, his relationship with the complainant as a romantic relationship, and to ‘get on the front foot’ … with the police investigation,” the judgment read.

“The prosecution submitted at trial that the statements in the notes were so ridiculous and exaggerated that the jury could reject the account in them.”

Prosecution said that the jury should accept them to be deliberate lies told by Mr Kakule, which showed a consciousness of guilt.

However, Justices Livesey, Bleby and David said they were not persuaded that the notes were not consistent with Mr Kakule putting forward an explanation about his sexual interactions with the alleged victim.

“There was no feature of the notes that rendered them inherently implausible such that it could be concluded that they constituted deliberate untruths,” they said.

“In our view, it was not open for the prosecution to rely on (Mr Kakule’s) provision of the notes to police as lies evidencing a consciousness of guilt.”

As a result they overturned Mr Kakule’s conviction and remitted the matter for retrial.