High-profile man accused of rape and co-accused Patrick Sinnott to face contested committal

The lawyer for a high-profile man accused of rape has called the alleged victim’s claims into question and asked for phone records as the case takes a step towards a trial.

Patrick Sinnott outside court earlier this year. Picture: Alexander Blain

The lawyer for a high-profile man accused of rape has asked for the victim’s phone records as he alleged she had made “false allegations” and “admitted to lying to police”. However, it is not clear if the records he is seeking actually exist, a court heard.

The man – who cannot be identified after he was granted a gag order on his case – and his co-accused Patrick Sinnott appeared virtually in Geelong Magistrates Court on Tuesday for a brief committal mention as a potential trial draws nearer.

Mr Sinnott was represented by Holly Boylan, and the other accused by silk Dermot Dann KC.

Mr Sinnott faces four charges, including digital rape and sexual touching without consent.

His co-accused has been charged with five alleged offences including oral and digital rape and sexual touching without consent.

All charges stem from an alleged incident that took place in Geelong.

No details of the alleged offending were aired during the brief administrative hearing. According to charge sheets released by the court, charges against both men were filed in February this year.

When the matter was called, the court heard a Form 32 had been filed and a date allocated for a two-day contested committal in September.

A Form 32, or case direction notice, informs the court of where a case is headed, indicating the outcome of discussions and whether a contested committal hearing, to test the evidence, is required before it is sent to the County Court for trial.

Mr Dann said there was an outstanding matter of disclosure, related to a download of the complainant’s mobile phone.

Mr Dann alleged the complainant had “admitted to lying to police” and “making these false allegations of rape”.

The court heard the informant had conducted a download of the complaint’s phone, however the communications sought by the defence, if they existed, would have occurred subsequent to the hand-up brief being served.

Magistrate Peter Mellas told the court that the prosecution had obligations, and disclosure needed to be complete prior to the committal hearing.

“If it’s come into existence, or if it’s known to exist, it needs to be disclosed,” Mr Mellas said.

However, given it was unclear if such material existed, he did not make any specific orders related to disclosure.

Prosecutor Nick Laidlaw told the court the complainant required a remote witness facility on the date, and he would speak with the police informant – the officer who charged both men – about the informant’s availability for the committal dates.

Mr Mellas granted the defence leave to cross-examine witnesses and adjourned the matter to the committal.

Originally published as High-profile man accused of rape and co-accused Patrick Sinnott to face contested committal