Weekend Herald

Lawyer accused of groping while in court

Litigator tells assault trial he thought allegation was a joke at first

- Jared Savage

Asenior lawyer is before the courts after being accused of groping a woman’s backside inside a busy courtroom where they both work. The man, in his 50s, pleaded not guilty to a charge of indecent assault.

The case — described by another witness as bizarre — played out in a two-day trial this week.

The lawyer, who is a partner in a law firm, has interim name suppressio­n which means some aspects of the evidence, such as the location and names of other witnesses, cannot be reported.

He denies deliberate­ly grabbing or touching the woman’s buttocks in the courtroom, but accepts his hand could have accidental­ly hit her in the crowded space.

The woman, who works for the Ministry of Justice, was leaning over to talk to someone seated in the public gallery of the court when she felt a “strong grip on my butt” on November 7 last year.

“It was a real tight squeeze . . . I was really shocked,” the woman said in court. “I quickly flung my head around to see who could have done that to me. I was shocked to see who I was looking at.”

She identified the lawyer, who was walking away towards the doors at the back of the court with his client. The woman said she was shaken and did not want to confront him without evidence, so kept working.

Later that day, she told a member of court security staff that “something happened” to her and they viewed the footage from the cameras inside the courtroom.

The CCTV recording is not a continuous video but a series of still images taken at about one-second intervals.

The seven-second clip was played at the trial this week and shows the woman turning sharply soon after the lawyer, and his client, walk past. The woman tried unsuccessf­ully to download the CCTV footage each day, but did not tell her supervisor until an unexpected witness came forward six days later.

Another lawyer had been sitting in the public gallery of the courtroom on the day of the alleged indecent assault.

The lawyer, an experience­d civil and criminal litigator, told the trial he saw the other lawyer walking towards him and deliberate­ly reach out to “strike” the woman’s bottom, then take his hand away.

The physical contact was less than a second and did not seem to be an accidental brushing, the lawyer said.

“I recall her looking surprised and looking around,” said the lawyer. “[The defendant] walked by as if nothing unusual had

It was a real tight squeeze . . . I was really shocked. Complainan­t

happened, nonchalant­ly.”

The witness said the “bizarre” incident made him uncomforta­ble but he wasn’t sure what to do. He even wondered whether there was a relationsh­ip between the other lawyer and the woman.

But speaking to a female colleague later confirmed the lawyer’s hunch he could offer his support.

“The following week I returned to the courtroom and approached her. I said I thought I saw something improper . . . she got emotional and said it was a cup, rather than a slap.”

The woman then notified her supervisor at the Ministry of Justice, before a formal complaint was laid with police.

She was cross-examined by defence lawyer David Niven about why it took so long for her to make the complaint as well as her changing descriptio­n of the physical contact.

“If you saw that happen to someone else, you would have intervened. The fact you didn’t do anything indicates you weren’t sure it happened?” Niven asked.

That was rejected by the complainan­t who said: “I know how this industry works, I wanted evidence.”

Niven suggested the woman was not sure of what happened to her, even after watching the security footage, until the other lawyer approached her.

Only then was she convinced the physical contact was deliberate, not accidental, which Niven suggested had made her memory unreliable.

That was also denied by the complainan­t who said: “I didn’t want it swept under the carpet. Now I had a witness.”

She said accidents happen but this “wasn’t an accident”.

It was an accident, according to the accused, who gave evidence in his own defence. He denied any deliberate attempt to touch the woman inappropri­ately, but conceded his hands could have struck her accidental­ly as he walked past in the crowded courtroom.

The lawyer, who is married with teenage daughters, initially thought it was a Christmas joke when he was charged.

“I wouldn’t deliberate­ly touch any woman or man . . . My reputation, my career, employment of staff, I wouldn’t risk it . . . I simply couldn’t and wouldn’t do something like this and effectivel­y end my career.”

The lawyer said he had never been accused of any sexual or inappropri­ate behaviour, which was corroborat­ed by other witnesses at the trial, including female lawyers, the local principal and police prosecutor.

If he had never been accused of inappropri­ate behaviour anywhere, including while drinking at social occasions, the lawyer questioned why he would do so publicly in a busy courtroom.

Under cross-examinatio­n, the lawyer denied “squeezing” the woman’s behind.

“I’m prepared to accept I struck her. A hand has been swung, I’ve been too vigorous in a tight area. I was not out to grab or grope anyone in court. I love the law. I’ve gone in and out of court thousands of times.

“I did not choose that day or the complainan­t to put it at risk . . . I’m sad and upset I’m in this situation and here today.”

Judge Tony Snell reserved his decision on the defendant’s guilt or innocence but indicated his ruling could be released by the end of the month.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand