Alleged butt-slapping MP case compared to Cardinal George Pell’s acquittal

A lawyer defending an MP accused of butt-slapping a colleague has likened it to Cardinal Pell’s acquittal when arguing why the case should be dropped.

The lawyer defending the MP who allegedly slapped a colleague on the bottom has likened the case to Cardinal George Pell’s as she insisted her client be acquitted on the grounds of reasonable doubt.

Sam Duluk, former Liberal and now independent MP, was charged with one count of basic assault after he allegedly “loudly” slapped SA Best MLC Connie Bonaros on the bottom at a crossbench Christmas party at Parliament House.

The member for Waite previously pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The Adelaide Magistrates Court has heard the drunken MP gatecrashed the party on December 13, 2019 and allegedly assaulted Ms Bonaros in the corridor with his right hand.

Former liberal MP Sam Duluk was charged with one count of basic assault after an alleged incident at a 2019 crossbench Christmas Party: NCA NewsWire / David Mariuz

He has been accused of slapping SA Best MLC Connie Bonaros on the backside after he gatecrashed the event at Parliament House. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Naomi Jellicoe

Defence counsel Marie Shaw QC likened the case between her client and Pell’s on the fact the court accepted their key witnesses “might be credible”.

She said the evidence of one witness, Emily Bird, was not able to be reconciled by Ms Bonaros and the prosecution had accepted the eyewitness was “credible and reliable”.

Ms Bird, who was the office manager for Greens MLC Mark Parnell in 2019, told the court on Tuesday she “couldn’t tell if it was a touch or a pat” and that Mr Duluk had a flat hand.

She motioned to the court that it was not a “whack” like Ms Bonaros claimed but looked like a hand was placed on her backside and there was no swing.

“The evidence of Ms Bird must be a source of reasonable doubt in the same way as it was with Pell,” Ms Shaw told the court on Wednesday.

“Your honour might consider the judgment behind Pell.

“In that case, there was evidence from the complainant (about) the alleged acts of sexual abuse … there was evidence from other witnesses that indicated Mr Pell was in a different area at the front of the Cathedral at the time.

“The approach in that situation was … although the finder of fact can decide that a witness might be credible or reliable, there might be other evidence in the case that is the source of reasonable doubt.”

Ms Shaw invoked the case of Cardinal George Pell when arguing reasons why the case against her client should be dropped. Picture: Victor Sokolowicz

Cardinal Pell was released from jail in April 2020 after his conviction for historical child sexual abuse was quashed by the High Court.

When acquitting Cardinal Pell of the charges in April last year, the bench of the High Court found there was “a significant possibility that an innocent person” had been convicted “because the evidence did not establish guilt to the requisite standard of proof”.

Ms Shaw also suggested on Wednesday the touch on Ms Bonaros’ bottom was “no different” to a touch or pat on the shoulder.

Marie Shaw QC, for the defence, also suggested the touch on Ms Bonaros’ bottom was ‘no different’ to a touch or pat on the shoulder.

But prosecutor Anika Francis hit back, arguing slapping, grabbing, pinching or touching someone on the bottom was “not a normal social interaction”.

She said their case was that Mr Duluk slapped Ms Bonaros on the bottom without consent.

“The conduct described in the evidence is not conduct approved by the community in social interaction,” Ms Francis told the court.

At a press conference on Thursday, South Australia Premier Steven Marshall was asked if Mr Duluk would be allowed back to the Liberal Party.

“I’m not going to speculate on that because there is a court decision pending,” the Premier said.

“My understanding is the decision will be handed down next month.

“In our party, it’s not a decision of the political leaders but of the state director and state executive.

“Mr Duluk is not a member of the Liberal Party at this stage and we’ll wait and see what comes from the court in that hearing.”

Magistrate Jonathan Wells is yet to reach a verdict.

The matter has been adjourned until July 15.