A year after he was sentenced to four years in jail for raping a 17-year-old girl at a Kergunyah party, Charlie Star has appealed the jury's decision to find him guilty.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The men were charged with multiple counts of rape to reflect each alleged sexual act the victim said had occurred - as they moved from near the portaloos at the party to further behind a shed.
A jury in July 2019 decided Star was guilty of one count of rape by anal penetration, not guilty of vaginal penetration and was undecided on the third charge.
Bowran was found not guilty on four counts of rape and the jury was undecided on the fifth.
Defence barrister Dermot Dann QC told the Supreme Court on Friday that the prosecutor and judge had misrepresented Star's case to the County Court jury.
He said the judge gave a "fundamental misdescription" of the case made on behalf of Star when addressing the jury to sum up the case at the end of the trial.
It was argued she left out an argument made by the defence barrister that anal penetration did not occur by Star towards the end of the sexual encounter, when the prosecution said it did, but perhaps accidentally closer to the start. Instead, she just described the defence case as saying it was "accidental".
MORE NEWS FROM COURT:
"The question is whether the judge fairly described to the jury what the defence case was and accordingly what the issues were," Justice Chris Maxwell said on Friday.
Crown prosecutor Brett Sonnett said he did not believe the County Court judge erred because the defence argument that there was a different sequence of evidence than the victim claimed had "no evidentiary foundation whatsoever" and the judge was not required to put that in front of the jury.
He admitted the County Court prosecutor had been "flummoxed" when the defence changed the way it was arguing the case - moving from an argument about whether the sexual acts were consenual, to questioning if the victim remembered the sequence of events accurately.
Mr Dann also argued that because the County Court prosecutor told the jury to not accept the version of events Star and Bowran gave in their police interviews, they could not use evidence from those interviews to come to a verdict of guilty.
He described the prosecution case was "speculative" and "inconsistent".
The judges will hand down their decision at a later date.
