Accused drug dealer: I was raped by a police undercover agent

The target of an undercover drug operation claims he was raped by an undercover operative working for the police in an extraordinary case that will test the state’s new sexual assault laws.

The target of an undercover drug operation claims he was raped by an undercover operative who connected with him via the dating app Scruff.

A Sydney man charged over a large-scale drug supply operation claims he was raped by the undercover operative sent in by the police to catch him in a covert sting.

The stealth investigation that resulted in the man being charged with selling party drugs from his inner-city home involved a strategy where a civilian operative secretly working for the police matched with him on the gay dating app, Scruff.

The operative’s job was to win the man’s trust and then introduce him to an undercover cop posing as a legitimate drug buyer.

The man, who can’t legally be named, was charged with 22 offences – including supplying a large commercial quantity of the drug GHB. – as a result of the six month undercover police probe that saw him arrested on February 23, 2023.

The accused drug supplier claims he was raped by an undercover sent in by the police.

Police allege the man was selling the liquid party drug GHB

But the case was thrown into chaos this week after the man claimed in the Dowing Centre Local Court that he was raped by the civilian operative after the pair linked up on the dating app.

The court heard the operative was able to gain the man’s trust because they had known each other for several years and had been sexually involved previously.

It has not been explained what prompted the operative to work for the police.

Police have also been accused in court by the man’s legal team of hiding evidence that revealed the civilian operative’s involvement in the investigation.

On Thursday, his lawyers Warwick Korn and Abdul Tlais asked Magistrate Megan Greenwood to grant an order to cross-examine the civilian operative, the police officer in charge of the investigation, and the undercover cop.

The man’s lawyers Abdul Tlais and Warwick Korn have applied to cross examine . Jane Dempster/The Australian.

They are also asking the magistrate to reveal police information about the civilian operative that has been hidden in heavily redacted documents.

Potentially, the man’s case could be thrown out of court if it is found that a serious crime (rape) was committed during the investigation.

It is also a key test case for the NSW Governement’s new rape laws that criminalised telling certain lies to trick a person into consenting to sex, known as a fraudulent inducement.

ONLY IF WE HAVE SEX FIRST

The man’s barrister, Murugan Thangaraj SC, told the court the civilian operative offered to introduce his client to a “legitimate” drug buyer in November 2022, but only if they had sex.

The lie was that the operative was actually luring the man into an undercover police trap rather than a legitimate drug sale, Mr Thangaraj told the court.

GHB is a drug that is popular in the party scene

Mr Thangaraj told the court the operative committed an “extremely serious” crime by taking advantage of his status in the police operation to trick the man into having sex.

“The (man) believed what (the operative) was offering to be true and, on that basis, had sex with him,” Mr Thangaraj told the court.

Barrister Murugan Thangarak SC accused the police in court of hiding evidence

“No court would condone a sexual assault on a person for the purposes of setting up the victim for a drug supply,” Mr Thangaraj said.

The operative has not been charged.

POLICE COVER UP CLAIMS

The case has become a battle for evidence about the operative with police resisting defence subpoenas.

“It’s all very dubious,” Mr Thagaraj told the court. “The police continue their secrecy while maintaining very serious charges against our client

The police brief of evidence contained no police statements or notes about the operative.

“None were produced on subpoena because we were told they did not exist,” Mr Thagaraj told the court. “...The police are making efforts to avoid scrutiny of their role.

“No relevant officer made a single notebook entry in relation to the controlled operation (and the civilian operative),” he told the court.

Mr Thangaraj told the court that none of the secret recordings made by the undercover cop relating to the civilian operative were produced as evidence.

“...We were told the audio had malfunctioned for that day,” he told the court.

“(The officer) has significant credibility issues, which is why she must be cross examined,” he said.

Ms Greenwood will deliver judgment on the redacted documents application on August 23.

Got a news tip? Email [e-mail]