A choose has questioned the “focused” media consideration on a Sri Lankan cricket star as he prepares to face a trial over allegations he raped a girl after a global sports activities occasion.
Danushka Gunathilaka appeared in Sydney Downing Centre District Court on Monday carrying a crisp white jacket and black pants as he utilized for a judge-alone trial.
The cricketer has pleaded not responsible to raping a girl in her Sydney house whereas he was within the nation for the T20 World Cup final 12 months.
The court docket heard there had been vital media consideration on the case because the worldwide athlete was charged in November as he was making ready to fly house along with his staff.
Mr Gunathilaka has remained in Sydney since that date, ready for the matter to be handled.
Mr Gunathilaka’s lawyer Murugan Thangaraj SC mentioned there have been greater than 2.2m articles associated to the case, however later revised his estimation to “many many articles across many many platforms”.
He argued among the media protection was “not entirely benign” and would injury his shopper’s standing with a possible jury.
Judge Warwick Hunt famous he had considerations about potential prejudice after seeing Mr Gunathilaka’s costs on the entrance web page of a newspaper.
“I thought: ‘How can this man get a fair trial after all this publicity?’,” he mentioned.
“I’m not suggesting it’s been unbalanced. It’s just been focused.”
However, the crown prosecutor argued the chance of prejudicing a jury was restricted as a result of the overwhelming majority of the protection had been simple.
“The publicity is not necessarily adverse, it’s just merely reporting the allegations,” she mentioned.
The court docket was advised Mr Gunathilaka was initially charged with three further costs of sexual activity with out consent, which had been withdrawn in May.
Judge Hunt opined the judgment of some jurors could also be clouded by the preliminary 4 costs, which can make them make assumptions concerning the cricketer or the alleged sufferer.
“Those kinds of speculations ahead of a trial only take place in this case because of the publicity,” he mentioned.
“Because there’s been that regrettable legal chronology well reported, I do consider that the level of public media interest in the case may lead to a compromising of the accused’s interests at trial.”
He granted the cricketer’s utility for a judge-alone trial, which is estimated to take 5 days.
Mr Thangaraj additionally made an simultaneous utility to fast-track the trial so his shopper might return to Sri Lanka as quickly as doable if cleared of the sexual assault cost.
He mentioned it was essential to expedite the proceedings so Mr Gunathilaka might resume his sporting profession and to proceed to financially assist his household.
The court docket heard the cricketer has been recognized with extreme medical despair, which is exacerbated by the continuing authorized proceedings and media protection.
“I’m persuaded the accused is under some psychological pressure that will continue to grow,” Judge Hunt agreed.
He set the trial down to start on September 18 after the crown prosecutor lent her “unequivocal” assist to expediting the proceedings.
Mr Gunathilaka has been stranded in Australia since he was arrested over the sexual assault allegations final 12 months and advised to give up his passport.
Police allege the cricketer matched with a girl on a courting app and chatted along with her quite a lot of occasions on-line earlier than they met on November 2.
The pair had drinks within the metropolis earlier than they went again to the lady’s house within the jap suburbs of Sydney round 11pm, in line with police.
Mr Gunathilaka allegedly ignored the lady’s request to “take it slow” and as an alternative sexually assaulted the 29-year-old lady in her own residence.
Police allege the cricketer engaged in “forceful” intercourse with the lady throughout which he choked the lady thrice.
The lady advised police she was “too afraid to do anything” and he or she had solely consented to sexual activity with the cricket star if he agreed to put on a condom.
The lady later discovered the condom on the ground beside the mattress, in line with police.
The court docket was advised the sexual assault cost associated to “stealthing”, the non-consensual elimination of a condom throughout intercourse.
“There is no suggestion that there was any lack of consent or that our client was aware of any lack of consent,” Mr Thangaraj advised the court docket on Monday.
Source: www.perthnow.com.au
