Government worker ‘bitten’ in altercation over iPad
A government worker cleared of attacking a cleaner because he believed he was under surveillance was allegedly called “a dog” and bitten.
The Blue Mountains News
Don't miss out on the headlines from The Blue Mountains News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Mechanic to face court on burnout charges
- Adroit Piping must expand to meet global demand
- Winmalee Village Centre’s al fresco future revealed
A government worker cleared of attacking a cleaner because he believed he was under surveillance was allegedly called “a dog” and bitten.
Rowan Gregory Hutchinson, a 64-year-old council road engineer from Katoomba, appeared before in Katoomba Local Court on charges of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and destroy or damage property. He denied the charges.
Adam Stephen Ralph, also from Katoomba, told the court he parked his car to have a cigarette after cleaning a Katoomba unit at 4 Echo Point Rd about 2.10pm on March 24 and “I hadn’t even got a drag or two in before he (Mr Hutchinson) attacked me”.
“He’s thrown my iPad down (on the ground), bear-hugged me and smacked me on the right side of my head,” Mr Ralph said.
“There was a scuffle on the ground ... I’ve tried to bite him so he’d release his grasp on me.”
Mr Hutchinson, who lives at 4 Echo Point Rd, also told the court he was bitten, adding “he tried to strangle me and he got me into a headlock”.
“I held him to the ground ... (and) negotiated with him to essentially call the call thing off,” Mr Hutchinson said.
Photos of Mr Ralph submitted by police officers to the court were described as showing injuries to both elbows, his arms, palms, back and head.
Magistrate Geoffrey Hiatt said on the evidence provided he could not beyond reasonable doubt say the defendant was not acting in self-defence and dismissed the case.
Given Mr Hutchinson’s clean criminal record, Magistrate Hiatt determined no conviction will be recorded against him.
But in the matter of Mr Ralph’s iPad, Magistrate Hiatt said it was difficult to discern if it was thrown on the ground intentionally.
He also questioned Mr Hutchinson’s choice of actions, saying “there were other options available” to him.
Both men agreed there was an iPad on the roof of Mr Ralph’s car and that the incidents occurred because Mr Hutchinson moved it.
In Mr Hutchinson’s account to the court the iPad was being used for “surveillance” purposes and that Mr Ralph was trespassing.
Mr Ralph said he’d put it there and begun filming “because I wanted to protect myself”.
The court was shown the footage shot from the iPad on March 24 where Mr Hutchinson is seen walking towards Mr Ralph’s vehicle and the iPad then appears to be violently shaken. A man is heard calling someone “a dog”.
The men agreed Mr Ralph was speaking, but both claimed they were being attacked when the iPad was shaken.
Magistrate Hiatt said if Mr Hutchinson was concerned about surveillance or trespassing, he could have called the police.
A police witness told the court Mr Hutchinson made no trespass claims against Mr Ralph on March 24.
Under cross-examination Mr Hutchinson admitted he had had previous altercations with Mr Ralph, physical and verbal, including over Mr Ralph once using the common laundry, and that he also had issues with other cleaners of the building block.
He explained to the court that as a member of the body corporate he felt entitled to ask Mr Ralph to remove himself and his vehicle from the common property, which he says he did “at least eight times”.
Mr Ralph told the court, “I didn’t feel I had to leave”.
Magistrate Hiatt told Mr Hutchinson grabbing the iPad was “reckless” and ordered he pay to repair the damage caused to Mr Ralph’s Apple iPad.