Judicial Commission of Victoria releases findings into Richard Pithouse investigation
The judiciary watchdog has released scathing findings following an investigation into “inappropriate” comments made by controversial Magistrate Richard Pithouse to a rape complainant.
True Crime
Don't miss out on the headlines from True Crime. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A controversial Melbourne magistrate’s comments suggesting a rape complainant suffered “buyer’s remorse” was “inappropriate, insensitive and gratuitous and should not have been made”, the judiciary watchdog has found.
A Judicial Commission of Victoria investigation into Richard Pithouse’s conduct determined his remarks could reasonably be construed as victim-blaming.
The commission’s investigation was sparked a month after the Herald Sun revealed Mr Pithouse’s comments in December 2018.
Mr Pithouse, at a hearing in October 2018 where a rape victim was seeking compensation, suggested she had “put herself in that position” following a night of drinking.
He went on to say “intoxication is not an excuse” and “there is an old adage that you can’t profit from your own malfeasance”.
Mr Pithouse also suggested the reason the victim called a sexual assault crisis line the following morning was “buyer’s remorse”.
“The comment indicates the officer had a closed mind and was not impartial,” the commission found.
“The officer’s comment was highly inappropriate and insensitive and to a reasonable observer, the comment would be construed as the officer speculating the applicant had not been raped, but rather consented to sexual intercourse and then regretted it the next day.”
The commission recommended Mr Pithouse undertake necessary coaching and mentoring, as well as other judicial education programs, particularly focusing on the experiences of victims of crime.
It urged chief magistrate Lisa Hannan to counsel him on appropriate judicial conduct including the need to exercise sensitivity, courtesy and respect in the courtroom towards all court users.
The commission also found further “inappropriate and insensitive” comments made by Mr Pithouse about a victim of family violence during a bail hearing in November 2017 infringed the standards of conduct expected of judicial officers.
On hearing the victim had not made a statement, he said: “Well, it’s her right to get beaten up if she wants to, I suppose” and “she won’t make statements, she won’t make complaints, what am I to do?”.
A September 2017 crash in which Mr Pithouse damaged property before fleeing the scene and not reporting it to authorities was “not a momentary lapse in judgment but a conscious decision to continue driving”, the commission said.
Mr Pithouse’s failure to stop showed a failure to respect and observe the law, and brought the office of magistrate into disrepute, it found.
A magistrates’ court spokeswoman said the court would not be commenting on the commission’s findings. She also would not say what Mr Pithouse’s employment status was, or if he would continue to preside over cases.
MORE NEWS:
CRIMINALS DIVERSIFY SHADY TACTICS DURING CORONAVIRUS
KILLER DRAG RACE DRIVER’S SENTENCE SLASHED