Jury hands down verdict in trial over alleged carjacking

A jury has found a Geelong man stole a car, but did not “jack” it.

Christopher Oakley stood trial this week in the County Court in Geelong. Picture: Supplied.

A jury has found a Geelong man stole a car, but did not “jack” it.

Christopher Oakley, 28, stood trial this week in the County Court in Geelong, alleged to have been responsible for a brutal aggravated carjacking.

The prosecution alleged Oakley snapped the driver’s side window of a car and punched a man multiple times in the head before dragging him out of the car and eventually making off with it.

The jury delivered its verdict late Wednesday afternoon, finding Oakley not guilty of aggravated carjacking and not guilty on an alternative charge of carjacking.

However, it found him guilty of a second alternative charge, theft of a motor vehicle, which he had pleaded guilty to when he was arraigned.

The credibility of the alleged victim was questioned by Oakley’s defence, barrister Liliana Dubroja, who characterised him as a liar and perjurer.

Ms Dubroja pointed to differences in the victim’s statements regarding how he was pulled out of the car, whether he was standing when he was pulled out, and even the amount of times he was punched.

She told the jury in her closing address that Oakley had owned up to and taken responsibility for stealing the car, as evidenced by his plea and the fact he returned the vehicle hours later.

The theft was “an irrational, poorly-made, quick decision”, Ms Dubroja said, but the prosecution’s lack of evidence that he wanted the car before stealing it was a “gaping hole” in its case.

The jury, consisting of seven men and five women, ultimately agreed.

Following the verdict, Judge Michael O’Connell thanked the jury for their service.

“It’s not an easy task sitting on an jury, but to my observation, you’ve done well,” he said.

Oakley will now face a plea hearing before sentencing.

Judge O’Connell asked how much was going to be alleged at the hearing; crown prosecutor Fraser Cameron told the court Oakley had a prior criminal history of “some substance”.

His bail was extended. 

EARLIER: Victim questioned in trial over ‘brutal carjacking’ in Geelong

A jury has heard the closing arguments in a trial over a “brutal carjacking”, with the case hinging on the credibility of a key witness painted by the defence as a liar.

Christopher Oakley is standing trial in the County Court in Geelong accused of aggravated carjacking, stemming from an incident on May 30 2021 on Birdsey St in Thomson.

It is alleged Mr Oakley, 28, snapped off the victim’s partially opened window, punched him in the face multiple times and dragged him out of the car before making off with the vehicle.

Afterwards, the alleged victim went to a fish and chip shop, where emergency services were called.

Mr Oakley has pleaded guilty to theft of a motor vehicle, the jury heard, but contests the carjacking.

Crown prosecutor Fraser Cameron told the jury on Tuesday they had three verdicts open to them – to find Mr Oakley guilty of aggravated carjacking, a lesser charge of carjacking or simply the car theft.

Both the prosecution and defence dedicated time to taking the jury through CCTV footage that partially captured the incident.

Mr Cameron argued it supported the prosecution's case, and described some of the defence’s suggestions as to what happened as “pretty silly”.

Mr Cameron conceded there were differences in the alleged victim’s various accounts but said they were not fatal to the prosecution’s case.

“He puts mayonnaise on it, he embellishes … I’m not going to suggest otherwise,” Mr Cameron said.

“On critical issues there is a significant level of consistency in what he is telling people.”

Both the prosecution and defence agreed that Mr Oakley lied to police when he was first interviewed.

His lawyer, barrister Liliana Dubroja, told the jury the prosecution’s case had “inherent deficiencies” because the alleged victim was someone who had “a very troubled relationship with the truth” and lied under oath.

Ms Dubroja said something clearly happened at the car, but the prosecution could not prove the intent necessary for aggravated carjacking.

Mr Oakley’s decision to steal it was a “rash, spontaneous decision”, she said, noting that he returned the car several hours later.

Ms Dubroja told the jury that when he took to the stand, the alleged victim was “evasive, cunning (and) dishonest” and someone who added “colourful details … to bolster his story”.

She said the same evidence the prosecution said supported the alleged victim’s account, showed him to “be either incorrect or a liar”.

She pointed to differences between the alleged victim’s account to police in body camera footage, in a police statement the next day, a second police statement a month later, his testimony at a committal hearing last year, and testimony during the trial.

Differences included whether or not a knife was involved, how many times the victim was punched and how, and if, he was physically dragged out of the car.

The accounts were “completely at odds” Ms Dubroja said.

The jury began their deliberations just after 3.30pm on Tuesday.

Originally published as Jury hands down verdict in trial over alleged carjacking