Sex claims against doctor laid bare
The trial of a Christchurch doctor alleged to have indecently assaulted or sexually violated 14 men has revealed claims of groping patients’ genitals, inappropriate touching and a sexual encounter during a consultation.
Dr Rakesh Chawdhry faces 15 charges of indecent assault and one charge of sexual violation via unlawful sexual connection. He denies the allegations.
The complainants have given evidence behind closed doors in the Christchurch District Court over the past two weeks while heavy suppression was in place. For the first time, The Press can reveal what has been said.
Patient K saw Chawdhry three times in late 2015, seeking treatment for itchy skin.
The court heard that on the first visit Chawdhry offered Patient K his personal phone number. On the second consultation, a sexual encounter occurred.
While it was consensual, Patient K told the court: ‘‘I felt really gross about the whole thing.’’
A week later, the itchiness hadn’t abated and Patient K returned to the clinic. While he asked at reception not to see Chawdhry, he saw Chawdhry taking his paperwork.
‘‘I was shivering at this point,’’ he said, ‘‘I was so nervous about the whole thing.
‘‘He called me into his office. So when I was walking to his office I started recording [on my phone].’’
The recording, played to the court, heard Patient K ask to see a different doctor.
The other doctor was told what had happened with Chawdhry. It led to a complaint with the Medical Council and then police.
Thirteen other men came forward following stories on The Press in 2016 about Patient K’s complaint and efforts by the Riccarton Clinic, where Chawdhry worked at the time, to contact his patients asking about any issues they may have had.
Patient M told the court Chawdhry masturbated him during a check for sexuallytransmitted infections (STIs).
He confided to a friend but did not lay a complaint until after he saw media coverage of the investigation into Chawdhry.
‘‘It sort of hit me that others were being affected by this and that it happened after my consultation,’’ he told the court, ‘‘It sort of sunk in that if I had come forward then maybe it wouldn’t have happened.’’
‘‘I was at work [when I read the story]. It hit me pretty hard. I became quite emotionally burdened at the time. I ended up talking to my manager . . . She too said that I should come forward.’’
All the complainants have now testified in closed court at the judge-alone trial. Judge Jane Farish had suppressed any publication of the details of their complaints until all their evidence had been heard.
Many told similar stories. They either sought or agreed to a check for STIs or had complaints on or near their genital area and alleged Chawdhry inappropriately handled them during a physical examination. The doctor said it would be more comfortable for them if they were semi-aroused while he took a swab. Several said they felt unsure about this, or persistent questioning from Chawdhry about their sexual history, but complied.
‘‘Because I was lying down and I was naked and he was a doctor, I did what he said,’’ Patient K said.
Patient F told the court Chawdhry examined him after he raised a concern about his testicles. Chawdhry asked him to remove his lower clothing and lie on a bed in the consulting room. Patient F said Chawdhry masturbated him for several minutes.
Patient H, who presented with genital warts, said Chawdhry told him treating the condition with dry ice would be easier if he was aroused. It was not something he had heard in many previous treatments, he said.
‘‘He just kind of lent in and
grabbed [me] and said, ‘It’ll be a lot easier if I do it’,’’ Patient H told the court.
‘‘I said no and pushed his hand away. He said no it’s easier and he put his hand in to try and grab it again and I was like ‘no’, really stern with him, and he continued with the treatment like nothing had happened. It was kind of bizarre.’’
The complainants began giving evidence on Monday last week and finished on Thursday. In crossexaminations, defence counsels Paul Wicks QC and Kerry Cook took many of them methodically through their medical histories before putting to them that their recollections were either fabricated or untrue. All stood by their stories. To Patient K, Wicks said the defence evidence would be that there was no inappropriate touching or consensual sexual encounter.
Wicks exposed some discrepancies in the complainants’ testimonies, particularly regarding the timing of events or omitted details.
Witness A, who was not a complainant, but knew Chawdhry in a professional capacity, testified that Chawdhry said he preferred treating male patients over female patients and found it easier to get male patients to take their clothes off during consultations. He said Chawdhry once showed him photos on the gay dating app Grindr and told him they were of a patient who didn’t know they were talking to their doctor.
Under cross-examination, he
‘‘I was shivering at this point. I was so nervous about the whole thing. He called me into his office. So when I was walking to his office I started recording [on my phone].’’ Patient K
admitted to Wicks that when he spoke to police about Chawdhry, he supplied text message exchanges with parts of his side of the conversation deleted and complained that Chawdhry had called him ‘‘poopsie’’ in text messages when phone records showed he had called Chawdhry by the same name.
Patient E, a complainant who testified Chawdhry had inappropriately touched his genitals and later texted him about meeting for coffee, said during cross-examination Chawdhry had also treated him for severe depression, prescribing a medication with a lead-in period. He agreed with Wicks that Chawdhry contacted him via text message to check he was OK before the medication took effect.
The trial, before Judge Jane Farish, continues. Crown case is expected to close early next week.