Rape jury told victim said ‘no’
ACCUSED Geelong rapist Russell Clissold sexually assaulted an intellectually disabled woman despite her telling him “to stop” and protesting “no”, a court has heard.
Clissold, 70, tried his best to evade cameras outside the County Court yesterday where closing arguments were made in the eight-day trial.
Judge Michael McInerney will today give jury members their final instructions before they begin decide whether Mr Clissold is guilty of two counts of rape and three sexual assault charges.
The charges relate to an alleged incident at Mr Clissold’s Thomson unit in September, 2016, involving a woman with Down syndrome.
The jury was told the woman was almost 30 years younger than the man accused of raping her and had an IQ of 46, meaning she had difficulties communicating and limited understanding of sex.
Defence lawyer Tim Sullivan said the issues should provide the jury with reasonable doubts about the woman’s testimony, describing it as “vague, equivocal and unreliable”.
He said the pair did not have intercourse, so the rape charges could not be sustained, and the other sexual acts performed on Mr Clissold’s bed were consensual.
But prosecutor Jim Shaw reminded the jury of the woman’s testimony, which was delivered to a closed court.
Among the quotes he recounted from her were “I told him to stop”, “I said ‘no’”, “I tried to walk away”, “I don’t want him”, “I not like it” and “it hurt”.
“I remind you that the only evidence about what happened in that room on September 13, 2016 is what (she) says,” Mr Shaw told the jury. “Her communication difficulties don’t make her unreliable or untruthful.”
Mr Clissold waited at Geelong’s Moorabool St bus stop for 50 minutes from 7.45am on the morning of the incident before following the woman after she got off a bus, and striking up a conversation with her.
Security videos showed the pair getting into his car moments later. The jury heard they arrived at his unit about 9am before the accused man dropped her back in the CBD about 1pm.
The prosecution told the jury it was likely Mr Clissold wore a condom during the rape, and a forensic expert testified the defendant’s DNA was found inside her underpants.
But Mr Sullivan argued those samples could have got there by other sexual acts, such as kissing, and told the jury the woman might have consented but later denied she did so.
“Russell Clissold did not penetrate (her). If you have a reasonable doubt about penetration you must find (him) not guilty (of the rape charges),” Mr Sullivan said.
“I’m suggesting to you they had their clothes off, and he’s on top of her, groping her.
“Maybe she did consent, maybe it is something she wanted to do. She’s got a life, she’s got a right to do those things, and it might just be that she’s doing them.”
But Mr Shaw said the jury had to take the woman’s testimony, that she did not consent, at face value. If uncertain, he urged them to find him guilty on the basis that she was incapable of consenting to the acts that took place in the bedroom due to mental impairment.
The jury will begin deliberations once Judge McInerney has completed his final instructions.