The Block contestant appeals common assault conviction at Gambaro Hotel
Former Penthouse Pet and The Block reality TV star Suzi Taylor is appealing a conviction over a minor assault after she was set-up in a hotel lobby.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Former Penthouse Pet and reality TV star Suzi Taylor is appealing a conviction over a minor assault after she was set-up in a hotel lobby.
The 2015 contestant on The Block was found guilty of the common assault at Gambaro Hotel after she pushed and knocked a phone from the hand of Thelma Anderson who was recording Taylor in January 2020.
The verdict followed a hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court where it was revealed Ms Anderson had conspired with a television news reporter to stitch up Taylor during an altercation at the hotel. Anderson wasn’t accused of any criminal wrongdoing.
A video played to the court showed Ms Anderson, who is a furniture removalist, taunting Taylor and at one point pushing her.
The pair had agreed to meet up at the hotel for Ms Anderson to give Taylor money that she allegedly owed to her for removal or storage fees.
During questioning Ms Anderson conceded it was possible she may have called Taylor a “f***ing c**t”.
A Channel Nine cameraman gave evidence that Ms Anderson was working with a male reporter from the network and they had spoken before the incident.
In finding Taylor guilty of assault Magistrate Rosemary Gilbert convicted but did not further punish her given the circumstances of the incident.
“My concern is, it is clear that Ms Anderson set up the meeting for the purpose of there being filming,” Ms Gilbert said in October.
“It would be, I think, churlish of me to take the view that what flowed from there would be not unexpected.”
However Ms Gilbert found Ms Anderson’s conduct did not give rise to a provocation defence.
Taylor’s lawyer Michael Gatenby has appealed the verdict arguing Ms Gilbert erred in not concluding that Ms Anderson had consented to the “application of force” delivered by Taylor.
“The learned Magistrate concluded the complainant had (or probably had) acquiesced to the event that culminated in the relevant application of force,” Mr Gatenby said in court documents.
“That being so, the complainant should have been taken to have consented to the relevant application of force.”
The second ground of the appeal argues Mr Gilbert erred in not finding Ms Anderson’s conduct gave rise to a provocation defence. Provocation is a defence in an assault charge.
Taylor walked free from custody in May, after being sentenced for unrelated summary offences, declaring she was going to get on with her life.
Her appeal is listed in Brisbane’s District Court.