The Press

Rape alleged at party

-

A 15-year-old girl’s boyfriend tried to lock her in a bedroom to keep her safe during a party, but she was later allegedly raped by two men.

The Crown alleges Brooke Christie Rolleston and Brandon James Roche, both 20, raped the girl who was too drunk to consent to sex, but the defence says she agreed to the activity and regretted it later.

The girl took to social media to try work out what happened to her because she had no memory of it.

Rolleston and Roche have gone on trial before Judge Alistair Garland and a jury in the Christchur­ch District Court yesterday. The trial is expected to take all week, at least.

The men do not deny having sex with the girl at a party near Christchur­ch on January 30, 2016, but said she was consenting and ‘‘enthusiast­ic’’.

They each pleaded not guilty to rape and two charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection.

Crown prosecutor Deirdre Elsmore told the jury the trial was about the rape of an ‘‘extremely drunk’’ 15-year-old. She said it would have been obvious to the two men that she was so drunk she was incapable of consenting to sexual activity.

The Crown alleged Roche and Rolleston took the girl from a bed where she was asleep with two other women, and took her to another room where the rapes happened. The girl had no memory of that and when she was returned to the bed about 30 minutes later, she vomited.

The girl began making inquiries online the next day when she realised what people were saying.

Defence counsel for Rolleston, Craig Ruane, said his client admitting having sex but said it was consensual. That would be the major issue at the trial.

He said: ‘‘People can consent to do things when they are affected by alcohol, that they may not agree to do when they are sober.’’

The fact she regretted it in the morning, and could not remember it, did not make it sexual violation, he said.

Counsel for Roche, Trudi Aickin, said her client said the girl ‘‘appeared willing and enthusiast­ic’’. If a person believed on reasonable grounds that someone had freely given their consent, they were not guilty.

Even a person who was intoxicate­d and unable to remember, was capable of consenting. ‘‘Just because a complainan­t has no memory of what happened does not mean that she did not consent at the time,’’ she said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand