Alleged rapist asked to see girl’s breasts: court

As a schoolgirl laid bare-chested and bleeding before him, a Queensland businessman facing multiple rape charges could allegedly only think of one thing.

Wide Bay Burnett businessman Joe Prendergast was charged in June 2023, with 11 counts of rape, sexual assault, and the indecent treatment of children.

The vile alleged treatment of a schoolgirl, allegedly sexually assaulted by a regional Queensland businessman, was laid bare in court as the man’s legal team made a bid to force police to hand over the child’s medical records.

The girl is one of the alleged victims of Wide Bay Burnett businessman Joe Prendergast, who was charged in June 2023, with 11 counts of rape, sexual assault, and the indecent treatment of children.

Mr Prendergast has not entered any pleas and was not in court when his case was discussed on Wednesday, May 2.

The court heard more alleged victims came forward to police after the media named Mr Prendergast following legislation change in October 2023.

Mr Prendergast is the managing director of a boutique accommodation and winery at Moffatdale called the Dusty Hill Vineyard, which was granted more than $1million by the state government’s Growing Tourism Infrastructure Fund.

His company Dusty Joe’s Pty Ltd also operates a hotel and bakery in Goomeri.

Wide Bay Burnett businessman Joe Prendergast, who was charged in June 2023, with 11 counts of rape, sexual assault, and the indecent treatment of children.

At the Murgon Magistrates Court on Wednesday, May 1, 2024, Mr Prendergast’s legal team formally requested magistrate Andrew Sinclair order police to disclose information investigators had refused to hand over.

Some of the documents requested by Mr Prendergast’s lawyers related to a separate incident at one of the businessman’s properties which did not form part of the police prosecution’s case and did not result in any charges against Mr Prendergast.

Girl allegedly subjected to vile comments after injuries

The court heard after the schoolgirl was at Mr Prendergast’s property she was injured in an activity.

Her injuries were allegedly serious enough to cause her to fall in and out of consciousness, however an ambulance was not called.

The court heard while Mr Prendergast’s wife tended to cuts on the girl’s chest, she asked him to leave the room before removing the girl’s clothing. Mr Prendergast’s wife is not accused of any wrongdoing.

Mr Prendergast was alleged to have refused, stating, “no, I want to see your tits”.

The court heard that rather than taking the girl to hospital, she was given more alcohol by a different person.

A day or so later, the court heard the girl was taken to a doctor who called an ambulance, and she was rushed to hospital with broken bones and internal bleeding.

South Burnett businessman Joe Prendergast is facing more than a dozen sexual offence charges.

Police accused of “cherry picking” shared evidence 

Police prosecutor Barry Stevens said the child’s medical records from her injuries and the photos taken of her injuries were not evidence in the case, and police believed the child was entitled to her fundamental right to privacy.

Barrister Joshua Jones accused investigators of “cherry picking” the evidence they shared and said the material pertaining to the injuries was relevant because it was mentioned by witnesses in the case.

Mr Sinclair said he struggled to see how photographs of the girl’s injuries, or notes taken by medical practitioners were relevant to the rape case, especially when the alleged comment about the child’s breasts was not the subject of any of Mr Prendergast’s charges.

He noted the girl herself never spoke of the alleged comment.

“You can’t seriously suggest the obligation of the prosecution is to disclose, without any parameters anything they own – it would require them to disclose everything they own,” he said.

Lawyers attempt to recall application as tensions flair

Doubling down, Mr Jones went on to say information may be relevant to pretrial hearings when witnesses were cross-examined, as it could be used to determine the credibility and reliability of the girl.

“I cannot recall an occasion… where a witness identifies something in their evidence, in the brief, such as a photo... and yet they won’t give it to us?

“We haven’t been met with, ‘it’s an indecent image in some respects’, we’re just told ‘we’re not giving you the photograph.’ It doesn’t make any sense.”

Mr Sinclair said they were “on the periphery of the most remote collateral issues that I can imagine and I personally can’t imagine the jury would give any weight to what so ever”.

A frustrated Mr Jones said considering the pushback he received from the police, Mr Sinclair’s comment was “unfair”.

“We’re getting pushback on things that are just so routinely – I have not encountered a situation with police or the director of public prosecutions having in their possession… a brief of evidence and say we’re not giving it to you,” he said.

He noted he travelled to the police station to view the files the day before court, but the investigators refused, despite earlier indicating some cooperation.

Wide Bay Burnett businessman Joe Prendergast, who was charged in June 2023, with 11 counts of rape, sexual assault, and the indecent treatment of children.

Mr Jones said he could order a subpoena to obtain the documents, and sought to withdraw the application before the court and serve the summons instead.

However, Mr Sinclair said it was too late and he would make a ruling on the application, noting it would not interfere with Mr Jones’ decision to issue a subpoena.

Decision on disclosure application adjourned 

Mr Sinclair said he found it difficult to find police had failed their disclosure obligation when Mr Jones himself did not know what was in the medical documents, let alone the unlikely chance that they mentioned anything to do with alleged sexual abuse.

“I can’t make a disclosure direction unless I can be satisfied that the prosecution’s failed to comply with any particular obligation,” Mr Sinclair said.

He adjourned his ruling on the disclosure application to May 7, but indicated he would approve some of the lawyer’s requests, such as the transcript of one of the alleged victim’s interviews.

Mr Prendergast did not attend proceedings, and he was excused from attending court when the matter is next mentioned before the Murgon Magistrates Court on May 15, 2024.

Originally published as Alleged rapist asked to see girl’s breasts: court