Ipswich rapist denied bid to appeal conviction after claiming judge, prosecutor influenced the jury

A convicted Ipswich rapist who had attacked his ex-partner in her bed while she slept and demanded she do what she was “told” has failed in a court appeal. WARNING GRAPHIC DETAILS

An Ipswich rapist who on one occasion was bitten on the penis while forcing himself on a woman has lost a bid to appeal his conviction, after claiming the judge and prosecutor influenced the jury in his trial.

On August 5, 2020, a jury found the man guilty of four counts of rape following a trial in the Ipswich District Court.

The man, who cannot be named to protect the victim’s identity, raped his ex-partner after following her into her home a few days after they broke up in January 2019.

According to court documents the woman said she arrived home from work at night to find the man sitting outside her house and she told him she was going to bed.

He followed her and got into bed and she fell asleep but woke to find him raping her.

According to the documents, she told him stop but he pushed down on her neck and continued to assault her.

A week or so later, the pair text messaged each other and woman confirmed she did not want a relationship with him and said “I am sick of you f***ing me when I am trying to sleep”.

He responded: “I didn’t know it offended you, me doing what I did to you the other night either. You didn’t say anything.”

She replied that she had kicked him and told him no and he apologised but said, “you’ve told me in the past to ignore you saying no”.

Then, on February 14, 2019, the man was at the woman’s house when he attempted to kiss her and she resisted.

He then followed her and pushed her onto a lounge and climbed on top of her as she yelled at him and slapped him in the face, the documents said.

The man grabbed the woman by the hair and dragged her into her bedroom and threw her on the bed, and she crawled away from him and asked for some water and he said: “Don’t f***ing move, stay there”.

He returned with water and then tried to grab her, and threw her onto the bed, pinning her stomach and head down, despite protests he was hurting her.

A rapist has failed in a court appeal after several attacks on a woman. Picture: FILE

The man said: “Shut the f*** up. Do as you’re told. This isn’t about you”.

She resisted but the man removed her clothing and digitally raped her.

He then tried to force his penis into her mouth so she bit it.

He raped the woman before saying: “You wouldn’t have got hurt if you’d just done as you were told”.

After being found guilty by the jury, the man was sentenced to six and a half years’ imprisonment with no parole recommendation.

According to court documents, the man launched an appeal against his conviction and his sentence, but the latter aspect was discontinued.

The man represented himself in the appeal, which was heard in September last year with the decision being delivered earlier this month.

He launched his appeal on the grounds that: There was a miscarriage of justice due to misconduct of the prosecutor; There was a miscarriage of justice as a result of the trial judge’s failure to address; There was a miscarriage of justice as the trial judge erred in his summing up, and that the verdicts were unsafe and unreasonable.

He alleged the prosecutor’s misconduct included expressing personal opinion, inappropriate comments, inflammatory statements, rhetorical questions, an incorrect statement, an implied criticism of defence counsel and omissions of evidence.

However, Supreme Court justices Hugh Fraser, Debra Mullins and Paul Freeburn agreed that there was no discernible unfairness in the approach of the prosecutor.

The man also alleged that the trial judge erred by using emotive words and when summing up the case and that he should have intervened and stopped the prosecutor or discharged the jury.

The justices denied these grounds agreed that the trial judge’s summing up was “careful and appropriate”.

“Further, the trial judge’s summing up was entirely fair and included an accurate summation of the rival contentions.

“At trial counsel for the appellant made no complaint about either the prosecutor’s address or the trial judge’s summing up.”

They concluded that leave should be refused to tender new evidence and the appeal should be dismissed.