Three guilty verdicts at violation, bashing trial
A jury has found a Christchurch man guilty on charges of sexual violation and assault but has mainly acquitted him on a series of bashing charges at the end of a trial that ran for almost three weeks.
Christchurch District Court Judge Gary MacAskill remanded 40-year-old Edward Thomas Booth in custody for sentencing on December 18 and asked for a pre-sentence report and victim impact statements.
One of the two victims was unable to give evidence at the trial because she had suffered an aneurysm since the Crown alleged she was bashed by Booth. However, the jury found him not guilty of that bashing, with Booth claiming that he found the woman injured at her home and called for help.
The trial was unusual because the Crown was allowed to call evidence from a woman who had claimed to have been raped by Booth in 1998, though he was acquitted at that trial.
The Crown alleged that there were similarities between that sex attack and his behaviour that would be described in relation to two other women.
He was found guilty of sexually violating one of the women by dragging her upstairs and raping her, and sexually violating her by anal penetration.
The jury found him not guilty of another allegation of rape, burning her with a hot nail, and unlawful sexual connection by penetration with a bottle and a banana.
They found Booth not guilty of another assault that broke the arm of the second woman, but found him guilty of an assault that involved her being thrown into a television cabinet.
Two charges alleging the most serious assaults on that woman – that she was bashed, and burned – drew not guilty verdicts.
Some other charges including allegations of strangling, injuring with reckless disregard for safety, and assault with intent to injure by punching, were discharged by the judge at the end of the Crown case.
The Crown alleged there was a pattern of Booth’s behaviour with the three alleged victims, with the types of attacks and him being remorseful and apologetic afterwards.
Defence counsel Andrew Bailey was critical of the quality and reliability of the Crown witnesses, with one of them not even being sober when he came to court to give evidence, he said.
The jury returned its verdicts after a retirement of about 15 hours.
Category: Focus
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Connect
Connect with us via: