News location:

Canberra Today 13°/16° | Monday, May 6, 2024 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

Media denied right to name high-profile rape accused

Media lawyer Zander Croft said they’d continue to pursue the application to name the accused. (Darren England/AAP PHOTOS)

By Rex Martinich in Toowoomba

A QUEENSLAND magistrate has denied or adjourned applications by major media companies to reveal the identity of a high-profile man accused of rape.

The man, facing two charges of raping a woman in October 2021, had his case mentioned for the second time in Toowoomba Magistrates Court on Wednesday.

Solicitors for News Corp, Seven and Nine networks, and the ABC applied to magistrate Kay Philipson to use her discretionary powers to grant an exemption to Queensland’s Sexual Offences Act that prohibits naming people accused of rape unless and until they are committed to stand trial.

Ms Philipson said it was written in the “strict construction” of the law that she could not use those powers unless the matter proceeded to a committal hearing.

“I’m doing no more on this mention than determining where proceedings are at and what the next step is. I’m not holding a committal today, I’m not taking witnesses today,” she said.

The high-profile man was excused from appearing in person and his barrister Andrew Hoare said there had been issues with some elements of the prosecution’s electronic brief of evidence not functioning.

The media organisations had also sought to gain access to court documents about the case but Ms Philipson said she had no power to impose orders on the registrar, who receives and manages court paperwork.

“Where is my power to direct the registrar to do anything?” Ms Philipson said.

The high-profile man was excused from appearing in person and Mr Hoare said there had been issues with some elements of the prosecution’s electronic brief of evidence not functioning.

Mr Hoare said prosecutors had sought a forensic download of evidence and a further statement from an expert and his client’s legal team would need six weeks to examine the prosecution’s brief of evidence.

“We will be requesting six weeks to review the entirety of the brief and to be in a position to inform the court as to how this matter will progress and the next mention,” Mr Hoare said.

Ms Friedewald did not oppose the length of the adjournment and said it was appropriate as prosecutors needed a month to prepare their report.

Ms Philipson granted an application for the matter to be adjourned until April 5 at Toowoomba Magistrates Court, extended the accused man’s bail and excused him from appearing in person at the next hearing.

The media organisations’ lawyer, Zander Croft, said outside court that his clients would continue to pursue their application to name the accused man.

Mr Croft said the one application that was dismissed would not affect other applications to name the accused and to grant access to court documents.

“The next stage would be that the application will be heard at a committal hearing… if it proceeds to a committal,” Mr Croft said.

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Australian Associated Press

Australian Associated Press

Share this

2 Responses to Media denied right to name high-profile rape accused

Jane says: 22 February 2023 at 3:33 pm

Their name has already been seen on the court lists for their last mention, so plenty of us do know who the case refers to, already. It’s a bit late now to not want to reveal their identity; it’s like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted.

Reply
Curious Canberran says: 22 February 2023 at 9:20 pm

Is the title of this article factually correct? “Media denied right…”, according to the magistrate there is no such right. Yes, their applications were formally denied and I think the magistrate would have been annoyed to have to address it in the first place, as I am sure the “major media companies” solicitors already knew they cannot do so and therefore are intentionally wasting the courts time to grab some headlines.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews