Indecent act with child charge against ex Croydon doctor Matthew Taine discontinued

A former Croydon doctor who was charged with sexually assaulting a boy patient has left court after charges were discontinued.

Dr Matthew Taine will not stand trial.

A former Croydon doctor will not stand trial to face an accusation he committed an indecent act with a child during a medical examination.

Matthew Taine, 71, fronted the County Court on Monday after he was charged with committing an indecent act with a child under 16.

However, the prosecution announced a discontinuance in the criminal proceeding in court today and Dr Taine was free to leave.

The drawn out court process went through the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court before Dr Taine was ordered to stand trial.

The magistrates’ court heard Dr Taine allegedly touched the genitalia of a boy.

Multiple witnesses including the complainant gave evidence at the committal hearing heard in late-2021

A witness told the court they believed the victim said Dr Taine had sexually assaulted him while he was unconscious during an examination in the 90s.

Dr Taine was charged in January, 2021.

The allegation was referred to police in 2019, the same year Taine left his former Croydon practice.

Sean Cash, for Taine, put it to a witness that the examination lasted about 40 minutes.

A the committal hearing in late 2021, the court heard the complainant’s mother told Dr Taine her son had “blacked out” prior to taking him in for the examination.

The mother told the court she couldn’t recall what happened in the consultation room but guessed she told Dr Taine her son had collapsed.

“He (the complainant) gave me a look which made me feel a bit uncomfortable inside …,” the mother said.

The court heard the mother had to leave her son alone with Dr Taine to fetch medication.

Mr Cash pressed the mother whether she could actually recall any “look” made by her son.

The mother told the court she couldn’t recall her son’s state following the consultation.

Knox SOCIT detective Senior Constable David Stevenson told the court he interviewed the complainant in 2019.

Mr Cash submitted the complainant was an “unreliable” witness and a magistrate must weigh the prosecution case at its “highest”.

“A magistrate could conclude that the prosecution’s case, taken at its highest, could not support a conviction due to deficiencies in the credibility or reliability of its witnesses …,” Mr Cash said.

“The deficiencies and the reliabilities of (the complainant’s) evidence are fairly obvious in my respectful submission

“He maintains at various times he was passed out, really out of it, confused, unconscious … ‘the doctor jerked on my penis a couple of times while I was unconscious’, he confirmed that’s what he told (a witness) … we say all of those factors (time and age of alleged victim at the time) in combination are so significant to suggest (the complainant’s) evidence is particularly unreliable … a jury wouldn’t be able to support a conviction.”

Kate Ottrey, for the OPP, told the court the complainant was a “very impressive” witness.

“(The complainant) gave clear evidence about what occurred, what was happening with his body, what he can remember and what he wasn't able to do at the time of the offending,” Ms Ottrey said.

“He said he could hear and feel what was happening … his complaint (to a family member) is consistent …

“I reject any assertion that just because someone is 10 years old their memory is worse than that of an adult.”

[e-mail]