Opening the Crown’s case this morning, prosecutor Pearl Philpott told the jury the man knew the two complainants through a sports club.
“In the late 1990s, the defendant took advantage of two young men he mentored ... he supplied the teenage boys with alcohol and sexually abused them when they were vulnerable, intoxicated and alone.”
She said the man indecently assaulted the first complainant on two occasions and that both times the complainant had got drunk at a party, taken himself to bed and woken naked or partially naked next to the defendant, who was also naked.
The complainant, who was 15 at the time, had frozen in fear as the man touched his penis, put his penis on the complainant’s anus and touched the complainant’s anus with his hands, she said.
“[The complainant] didn’t say anything and neither did [the defendant]. All [the complainant] could hear was heavy breathing before he blacked out. The next morning ... he was still naked but [the defendant] was nowhere to be seen.”
Philpott said a similar incident happened about a year later at the man’s house, when the complainant had again got drunk at a gathering, passed out and had woken up next to the defendant, who was lying next to him naked again.
“[The defendant] started rubbing his penis against [the complainant’s] anus and also gyrating his naked body behind [the complainant].
“At this point [the complainant] told [the defendant] to stop. He said he only wanted to do this kind of stuff with a woman but [the defendant] just laughed it off as [the complainant] got up out of the room and ran away.”
Philpott said the second complainant had also got drunk at a gathering at the man’s house and had gone to bed, waking up with the man lying naked next to him.
The defendant squeezed the complainant’s groin area but the complainant pushed him away, told him to “f*** off” and the sexual touching stopped when the complainant moved to the edge of the bed, the prosecutor told the jury.
She said the next morning the complainant woke up to more touching. He pushed the defendant away and left the room.
In his opening address this morning, the man’s lawyer Ian Brookie told the jury the Crown’s opening address did not amount to evidence, asking the jury to keep an open mind.
“I just want to make it crystal clear to you that the defence is that these things did not happen. They are refuted, they are not truthful.”
Brookie cautioned the jury about what they would hear over the course of the week, saying human memory was fickle and it was up to the Crown to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
“Cases like this are difficult for all involved because of the subject matter, but also because there’s pressure on everyone in this room because we’ve all got roles to do, we’ve got one chance and we’ve got to get it right.
“And what we’re also going to face, and what some of the witnesses are going to face, is this issue of having to go back in time to try and recall what happened. Not all of the witnesses are going to be able to do that.”
Brookie told the jury the police had “thoroughly” investigated one of the complaints 25 years ago but took no action.
“The defence says that’s where that case should have been laid to rest. [The other complainant] comes on board 20 years later and, all of a sudden, both of these complaints are back before the court.
“The real issues are going to focus on whether or not these two complainants are giving truthful accounts of what they say happened and there’s going to be a big dispute about that in the trial and that’s what we’re here for.”
The trial, before Judge David Sharp and a jury of six men and six women, is set down for five days in the Auckland District Court.
- RNZ
