Doctor Sayonne Sivalingam faces Brisbane Magistrates Court for rape committal hearing

A nurse giving evidence in a doctor’s rape committal hearing has told a court there was no way the allegations could have occurred without her seeing.

Doctor Sayonne Sivalingam leaves a committal hearing for a rape charge at Brisbane Magistrates Court. NewsWire / Glenn Campbell

Major cracks have emerged in the rape case against a Brisbane ED doctor, as a nurse has told a court there was no way the allegations could have happened without her seeing.

Former Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital doctor Sayonne Sivalingam faced Brisbane Magistrates’ Court on Thursday charged with rape.

The prosecution allege Dr Sivalingham digitally raped a woman during a rectal exam in 2023, by inserting two fingers into her vagina.

During a committal hearing on Thursday, the court heard that the woman claimed that she had said “make it stop” and “is he in the right spot” during the procedure, but that the nurse hadn’t heard her.

The nurse who was present as chaperone during the procedure told the court she couldn’t remember anything abnormal.

The nurse said she knew she had chaperoned the examination but could not remember it by the time she spoke with police about it.

She said she had chaperoned at least 100 such examinations throughout her nursing career.

The nurse said that if Dr Sivalingham had inserted his fingers in the complainant’s vagina that she would have seen it, would have intervened, and would have remembered.

If the complainant had raised any concerns or said “make it stop”, as the complainant alleged, the procedure would have immediately been stopped according to the nurse.

She said she would have taken immediate action and certain protocols would have followed, including paperwork.

The court heard that the complainant alleged the nurse had been standing on the other side of her where she wouldn’t have been able to see the procedure.

But the nurse told the court that her role there was “to see”, and that she would not have – and had never in 10 years – positioned herself where she couldn’t.

The nurse’s testimony followed the complainant’s girlfriend’s, who told the court she had felt “uncomfortable” with a comment Dr Sivalingham made prior to the procedure.

She said she had opted not to join her girlfriend in the room while the procedure took place.

“The doctor turned to me and said yeah you don’t really want to see me – I’m not quite sure on the exact words – something along the lines of me touching your girlfriend’s arse,” she said.

“I felt that was very weird. I was a little bit shocked.”

She said the complainant had been quiet later that night, and then told her the next morning: “I don’t feel right down there”.

“She said ‘I feel sore and that he touched me in the wrong place’,” she recounted.

“I questioned that, I said ‘what do you mean’ and she said ‘he went inside my vagina’.”

“I went ‘are you sure’ and she said ‘yes I’m sure about that’.”

“ … She said that she didn’t know how a doctor could make that mistake.”

Doctor Sayonne Sivalingam leaves a committal hearing for a rape charge at Brisbane Magistrates Court. NewsWire / Glenn Campbell

The court also heard testimony from a doctor, Mitchell Shaw, who provided expert opinion on standard rectal examination procedures.

He said he believed it would be possible for a woman to feel penetration in the vagina when someone was actually penetrating the rectum.

“I openly and very readily acknowledge of course that by virtue of being male … I can’t speak to that from an experiential point of view,” Dr Shaw said. The court heard the complainant had been examined three days after the alleged rape, at which time a nurse noted tenderness and redness to her genitalia.

Defence barrister Jeff Hunter asked whether Dr Shaw would expect to see physical signs of digital penetration three days on.

“Possibly,” Dr Shaw responded.

“After digital penetration of the vagina, the majority of women who present to a hospital or a health service following that do not have any evidence of injuries.”

Dr Shaw said only around 20 to 30 per cent would present with physical injury.

“If gloved, lubricated fingers were inserted into the vagina, I wouldn’t expect in the majority of cases for there to be signs of physical injury three to four days later,” he said.

The court heard lubricant had been found inside the complainant’s vagina, but Dr Shaw said it was possible for some lubricant to end up “near or even in the vaginal canal” during a rectal examination.

Mr Hunter submitted to the court that no reasonable jury, if properly instructed, could possibly find his client guilty.

“Is it seriously to be suggested that what might have occurred in the course of this examination is that (the nurse) was grabbed on the arm by a panicked complainant and asked ‘is he in the right spot’ and she just did nothing?”

“(The jury) would have to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she’s either completely forgotten that the incident happened or that she’s wilfully covering it up.”

Magistrate Aaron Simpson said his assessment of the complainant’s evidence, given privately in a closed courtroom, was that she was “doing her best to recall what had happened, but she wasn’t sure”.

Before deciding whether to make a no case finding – which would effectively dismiss the charge – Mr Simpson said he would adjourn the matter to allow the prosecution to review a transcript of the evidence.

The matter was adjourned to August 16, and Dr Sivalingham’s bail was enlarged.

He was given leave to appear via telephone on that date, as the court heard he had moved to Melbourne.