The man was on trial for allegedly raping and assaulting a woman with whom he was in a BDSM relationship. Photo / 123rf
The man was on trial for allegedly raping and assaulting a woman with whom he was in a BDSM relationship. Photo / 123rf
WARNING: This story details rape allegations and may be distressing for some readers.
A man accused of raping his former partner while they were in a BDSM relationship maintains he always respected her use of their safe word and all sex acts were consensual.
He vehemently denied hitting andinjuring the woman with a piece of timber and a metal backscratcher during their “spanking” sessions, and said when he performed a “golden shower” on her, it was because she had requested it.
The man also maintained that he never raped the woman while the pair had “normal” sex, stating she never asked him to stop but had she, he would have immediately.
Yesterday, Judge Tony Greig accepted the man’s evidence and found him not guilty of rape, doing an indecent act and two of assaulting a person with a blunt instrument.
The man cannot be named to protect the woman’s automatic right to name suppression.
Judge Greig said the features of the couple’s relationship might be considered “outside the norm or even very odd”.
The trial is taking place in the New Plymouth District Court.
“It involved bondage and whipping and was also what is apparently known as a DDLG relationship which translates to ‘daddy dom, little girl’.
“This involved the complainant addressing [the defendant] as ‘daddy’ and being his ‘little girl’.
“I remind myself that even with those characteristics, such relationships are never a licence to override the other one’s wishes.”
The judge said it had been acknowledged by the man and woman that safe words were agreed upon and used during their sessions.
“Consent is withdrawn the moment a safe word is uttered,” the judge said.
Soft and hard limits
In this case, the woman accused the man of ignoring her use of their safe word, “pudding”, when he was allegedly spanking her with a piece of wood, which was not an agreed-upon item in their sex kit.
She made similar allegations about his use of a backscratcher and claimed the man knew she “hated” being urinated on, something she referred to as a golden shower, but said he did it to her anyway.
On the occasion when she alleged he raped her, she said they were having sex outside of a BDSM context and when it began to hurt, she asked him to stop multiple times.
In the man’s evidence, he said they had discussed the terms of their BDSM relationship before it began, agreeing on their “hard and soft” limits.
“A hard limit is something that you don’t want to do at all,” the man explained.
He said a soft limit was something “you’re curious about and want to try”, and they had several, including candle wax play and golden showers.
They had also agreed upon spanking, with the man only using his hand, until they later purchased floggers and paddles.
He said he had never used anything else to spank the woman.
The man said that “aftercare” was a part of their BDSM agreement.
He likened it to “how you would take care of a child after they hurt themselves”, and said he would “soothe” the area where the woman was spanked, or give her “cuddles” if needed.
The man understood the woman would use a safe word if she felt uncomfortable or something was wrong, and he would immediately stop.
That happened during a couple of spanking sessions, he said in evidence.
“I stopped what I was doing and I checked on her to see what was wrong, and I soothed her, and comforted her.”
It was his understanding that she would also use a safe word during intercourse if she wanted him to stop, but she said she had never done so.
The man said he had loved the woman and was devastated when she broke up with him.
He acknowledged he had not treated her well toward the end of their relationship, saying he was tired from working long shifts, and he took it out on her.
He had also gone on a trip with his ex, which upset the woman.
They broke up around that time, and the woman’s allegations followed.
The man’s lawyer, Nina Laird, accused the woman at the trial of making up the accusations to “pay for the way he treated you”, or for attention, which she denied.
The court heard that the woman accused him, publicly and privately, of raping her, and incessantly contacted him and his friends after their break-up.
He blocked her on all messaging platforms and complained to police, leading to her receiving a warning for her harmful online behaviour.
In messaging between the pair, the woman accused the man of raping her, and of having messed with her head.
“I gain no sense at all that he was trying to colour his evidence to his advantage.
“He conceded that he had behaved unpleasantly towards the complainant, particularly towards the end of their relationship.”
Judge Greig said the woman had found him an unpleasant partner, and this was the basis of her complaints about him in the early days after their break-up.
“Rape and serious assault were not at the forefront of the complainant’s mind when she talked about the defendant to their mutual friend ...”
The judge said he would not go as far as to say that the woman was lying, but aspects of her evidence appeared inconsistent.
However, he said the woman had also made credible concessions but reiterated the man’s evidence was “plausible and consistent”, and parts of it were corroborated by independent evidence.
“And for those reasons, all of the charges against him are dismissed.”
Tara Shaskey joined NZME in 2022 and is currently an assistant editor and reporter for the Open Justice team. She has been a reporter since 2014 and previously worked at Stuff covering crime and justice, arts and entertainment, and Māori issues.
