Mat Lowe: Tasmanian anti-vaxxer assaults fiance over kids’ jab fight

A Tasmanian man has been found guilty of assaulting his fiance after fighting over their children’s vaccination status, as his lawyer suggested the victim should also have been charged with assault.

A Tasmanian anti-vaxxer has been found guilty by a magistrate of assaulting his fiance over their children’s vaccination status, but ruled there was not enough evidence to support the prosecution case that he choked her.

West Launceston man Mathew James Lowe, 36, pleaded not guilty to the charge of common assault, which occurred on November 24 last year at the couple’s former West Launceston address, but on Thursday Launceston Magistrate Ken Stanton ruled there was enough evidence to find the charges proven.

Mr Stanton told the court Lowe and his victim had been in a relationship for 10 years and had two children together.

Lowe had “rigid” anti-vaccination views which were not shared by his fiance, such that she secretly got the jab.

Mr Stanton told the court Lowe favoured homeschooling the children if they were required to get the jab, which his fiance, who also expressed concern about whether their wedding could go ahead as planned if Lowe was unvaccinated, didn’t want.

On the day in question, the pair began arguing about the children’s vaccination status, at which point Lowe’s fiance began secretly recording their conversation on her phone.

Upon discovering this, the court heard, Lowe seized her phone and attempted to delete the recording, leading to a melee in which Lowe pushed the woman and grabbed at her hands when she attempted to retrieve it.

At some point Lowe’s fiance spat in his face, which the court heard she admitted to in evidence, and there was a further struggle when Lowe retrieved a set of car keys and attempted to leave their residence.

However, at this point Lowe and his fiance’s version differed: according to his fiance, the struggle for the car keys spilt over into the garage, where he tackled her to the ground and placed his hands around her neck and squeezed until she “couldn’t talk”.

Lowe denied this version of events.

Mr Stanton said the case was an instance of “oath on oath”, wherein the only evidence which corroborated Lowe’s fiance's account were her injuries, which included carpet burns to her knees and elbows, bruising and scratches to her neck.

On Lowe’s versions of events, his fiance’s injuries occurred during the grapple over the keys, wherein he told the court she was “dragged over the carpet”.

While Mr Stanton told the court he found Lowe to be an unconvincing witness, and that his evidence had a “rehearsed” quality to it, he said he couldn’t rule out the defendant’s version of events beyond reasonable doubt.

However, as it was accepted by both parties Lowe did push his fiance and grabbed at her hands when she attempted to recover her phone, and in a circumstance where Mr Stanton ruled Lowe was “not permitted” to take the phone, notwithstanding the provocation of his fiance secretly recording him, the charge was proved.

Defence lawyer Grant Tucker submitted to the court his client, who has two previous convictions for common assault, for both of which he received a fine, be discharged without penalty.

“She admitted she spat in his face – there’s been no blowback for her,” Mr Tucker said.

“That amounts to assault, in my submission a worse assault than (my client’s).”

Mr Stanton, who deferred his decision sentencing until Friday, to enable him to consider the submission, fined Lowe $800 and recorded a conviction.