Jurors have acquitted a person identified with “sexsomnia” of rape.
On Thursday, Timothy Malcolm Rowland, 40, was discovered not responsible of getting non-consensual intercourse with a lady at his Sydney condo on 26 August 2022, after the pair spent an evening out collectively.
The 40-year-old advised the seven-day jury trial he was experiencing an episode of sexsomnia, a medical situation the place folks exhibit sexual behaviour throughout sleep.
The not responsible verdict got here hours after jurors despatched a sequence of inquiries to Choose John Pickering at Sydney’s Downing Centre court docket.
One inquiry of concern to the choose regarded the results of committing crimes whereas an individual was unconscious.
“This can be a actually harmful logic,” the choose stated.
A jury shouldn’t be figuring out a case based mostly on legal guidelines it wished have been in place however as a substitute on the present legal guidelines, he warned.
Doing this might be unfair on any accused, he stated.
Somebody couldn’t be discovered responsible of against the law they did unconsciously, Pickering stated.
“We’re not about to punish folks for acts that they haven’t any lawful management over.”
There have been no present legal guidelines, guidelines or laws about having sexsomnia or doing one thing whereas having the medical situation, the choose stated.
“‘No legal guidelines about that exist. There are not any felony offences about that that exist. And it’s not so that you can create the regulation.”
Rowland and the girl went consuming at a cocktail bar in inner-city Darlinghurst on the night time of the alleged rape, returning to his condo about 1am, the jury heard through the trial.
As soon as there, they drank some extra and took a unadorned tub collectively earlier than the girl fell asleep in Rowland’s mattress, the events agreed.
About 6am, the girl allegedly woke to seek out Rowland having intercourse together with her earlier than she pushed him off, jumped out of the mattress and left the condo.
There was no dispute through the trial that Rowland had sexsomnia.
However the situation earlier than the jury was whether or not he was having an episode on the time of the alleged rape or whether or not he was awake.
It was additionally not in dispute that the girl was asleep when Rowland started having intercourse together with her.
Earlier on Thursday, the jury requested what kind of proof there might be to show somebody was awake.
And if there was inadequate proof, why was the case prosecuted and why did it come earlier than a jury, it requested.
Pickering stated it was none of his enterprise why the director of public prosecutions had determined to pursue the case in court docket.
It was additionally not the jury’s duty to marvel about these items.
As a substitute, he urged them to take a look at the proof earlier than them and decide whether or not the alleged rape had been proved past affordable doubt.
Figuring out a verdict was a “cold-analytical course of” which shouldn’t be involved with how the alleged sufferer or the neighborhood might really feel, he stated.
Supply hyperlink
