Why we can’t name the high-profile man charged with rape

The public was understandably curious about the identity of a high-profile man charged with the alleged rape of a young woman in 2021 when his case first hit the headlines.

But the media – and members of the public – are strictly prohibited from naming him.

Lawyer Rowan King (left) is seen outside Toowoomba Magistrates Court.Credit: AAP

This is why.

Under Queensland’s Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act, a person charged with rape, attempted rape, assault with intent to commit rape and sexual assault, cannot be identified until the matter is committed to trial, or the court orders they can be identified.

This means a person charged with one of those sexual offences cannot be publicly named until a magistrate has decided there is enough evidence on which a jury could convict during a trial, and sends the case up to the District or Supreme Court.

This can happen after a committal hearing, which might look like a trial (it is not) with witnesses called to give evidence and being cross-examined.

Or lawyers might tell the magistrate they agree to send the case to a higher court without a committal hearing.

If there is not enough evidence, the magistrate will dismiss the case, and the person’s name will never be revealed.

This protection against being named is not available for people accused of other crimes, including murder.

Across Australia’s legal systems, Queensland’s sexual offence identification ban before an accused person is committed for trial or sentenced is only shared by the Northern Territory and South Australia.

The man in question has been charged with rape over an alleged incident in October 2021.

The man’s matter was again mentioned at the Toowoomba Magistrates Court on Wednesday and promptly adjourned to give the parties time to analyse a report and the contents of the complainant’s phone.

A coalition of media organisations in February applied to magistrate Kay Philipson for a court order allowing identification of the man on the grounds it was in the public interest.

But after lengthy legal arguments, Philipson adjourned the application because the man’s matter – still at the committal mention phase – was too premature in its passage through the courts, she said.

Reporting of the man’s case in Toowoomba Magistrates Court sparked furious speculation on social media, but ordinary people posting online can get into as much strife as media organisations.

The maximum penalty is $14,375 or two years in jail, and people who prematurely publish the identity of a person accused of a sexual offence can also be charged with contempt of court.

The Queensland government supports a recommendation from the Women’s Safety and Justice Taskforce’s report, Hear her voice: Report two – Women and girls’ experiences across the criminal justice system, to remove pre-committal restrictions on identifying adults accused of sexual offences, as long as it would not identify alleged victim-survivors.

A spokesman for Attorney-General Shannon Fentiman said a bill would be introduced in the “coming months”.

The man remains on bail and the case will return to court on June 28.

- with Zach Hope