Judge Robert Newlinds SC blasts DPP over rape cases

A judge has blasted the state’s prosecuting agency for running rape cases he claims are doomed to fail, after one resulted in an “innocent man” spending almost a year behind bars.

Judge Robert Newlinds SC has taken aim at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Picture: Gary Ramage

A judge has blasted the state’s prosecuting agency for running rape cases he claims are doomed to fail, after one resulted in an “innocent man” spending almost a year behind bars.

Judge Robert Newlinds SC told the District Court this month that a Sydney man, who a jury found not guilty of rape, “should never have been prosecuted”, while the female complainant had made similar complaints resulting in five other men being charged.

In ordering the state to pay the acquitted man’s legal costs on December 5, Judge Newlinds called for “reform” on laws that prevent rape complainants’ prior sexual experience and reputation being used as evidence in trials.

Judge Newlinds told the court it appeared the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) was not properly investigating the strength of rape cases before dragging an accused through court.

“I am left with a deep level of concern that there is some sort of unwritten policy or expectation in place in the (ODPP) … that if any person alleges that they have been the subject of some sort of sexual assault then that case is prosecuted without a sensible and rational interrogation of that complainant so as to at least be satisfied that they have a reasonable basis for making that allegation…,” he told the court.

Judge Robert Newlinds SC has accused the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions of not properly investigating the strength of rape cases. Picture: AAP Image

The Sydney man was charged with raping the woman in May 2021 after she got drunk and invited him to her apartment.

He spent eight months behind bars with bail refused.

His trial heard the woman had a tendency to get blackout drunk and have sex with men, only to then accuse them of sexual assault because she could not remember what occurred.

The Crown told the court the man told police he knew the woman’s level of intoxication had impacted her ability to consent. The jury was also shown text messages between the pair sent that appeared to show the man believed the woman was consenting.

Evidence about the woman’s rape allegations against one of the other five men was included in the man’s trial, and Judge Newlinds said her evidence was “obviously flawed” and that the ODPP should have “joined the dots” between the cases.

“I think the prosecution took the lazy and perhaps politically expedient course of identifying that the complainant alleged she had been sexually assaulted, and without properly considering the question of whether there was any evidence to support that allegation, just prosecuted so as to let the jury decide,” he told the court.

A spokeswoman for Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Sally Dowling SC rejected Judge Newlinds’ comments and said: “The director intends to make a complaint to the Judicial Commission concerning the judgment delivered by Judge Newlinds in this matter.”

She said “the judge appears to misapprehend the operations of the ODPP …”, and added that three of the other five men the woman accused had pleaded guilty.

“The ODPP unequivocally rejects any suggestion that it makes prosecution decisions ‘lazily’ or on the basis of ‘political expediency’, or that it operates according to ‘some sort of unwritten policy’’,” the spokeswoman said.

Got a news tip? Email [e-mail]