Only an hour after he was confronted with accusations of a sexual assault, Wallabies star Kurtley Beale advised a participant supervisor he had “messed up”, a courtroom has heard.
Mr Beale, 35, is going through a jury trial at Sydney’s Downing Centre Court after pleading not responsible to sexual activity with out consent and two counts of sexual touching.
Police allege Mr Beale groped the lady’s backside on the Beach Road bar in Bondi on December 17, 2022, earlier than forcing her into oral intercourse in a stall within the males’s toilet.
The 29-year-old put the accusation to Mr Beale in a cellphone name secretly recorded by police.
Just an hour later, Mr Beale dialled then-rugby participant supervisor Isaac Moses.
“I messed up. I was out at the pub before Chrissy,” Mr Beale advised Mr Moses within the second name, which was intercepted by Bondi police investigating the allegations.
“A bird rang me out of the blue a saying… she’s like, a little bit upset because I misread the whole situation, the whole scenario.
“She performed oral sex on me, but like it wasn’t really anything. Literally two seconds, not even that.
“She’s like, I didn’t really consent to that action blah, blah … and I’m like, trying to recollect everything that happened.”
Mr Moses requested Mr Beale “did it happen?”
The rugby star replied: “Yeah, I remember being in the cubicle”.
Mr Beale mentioned he requested the lady if she was recording, to which she mentioned no, earlier than Mr Moses prompt she could have nonetheless been involved with the police.
“Kurtley, obviously she did consent otherwise it wouldn’t have happened. True, right?” Mr Beale replied: “Yeah”.
The name ended after Mr Moses knowledgeable Mr Beale his cellphone was dying and that he’d as an alternative name him on his spouse’s cellphone.
Staff members from the Beach Road bar inside the lads’s toilet through the time of the alleged assault additionally gave proof about what they noticed and heard on the evening.
Kitchen hand Nirmal Tamang advised the jury that he had seen two pairs of toes when he entered the toilet together with one other employees member shortly after midnight.
“You thought it was a male and female because you could tell one set of shoes were like running shoes and the other were female’s heels,” Crown prosecutor Jeff Tunks mentioned.
He added later: “You say the female’s heels were facing towards the door and that the men’s feet were facing towards the toilet seat (and) the wall.”
Under cross-examination, Mr Tamang mentioned he spent about two minutes within the toilet and he didn’t hear anybody say “no” or “stop”.
He went on so as to add that he additionally didn’t hear Mr Beale say “oh f**k off then”, because the alleged sufferer claimed, nor did he see any girl exit the toilet whereas he was there.
A second worker who was not working on the time of the alleged incident additionally advised the courtroom on Monday that he didn’t see or hear something “memorable” within the toilet.
The two males, in addition to a 3rd who didn’t give proof, are seen on CCTV getting into and exiting the toilet on the time of the alleged sexual assault.
The 29-year-old girl claimed in her proof final week that Mr Beale had been “forceful” when he pleaded for intercourse earlier than barging in on her within the toilet stall.
She later reported the matter to NSW Police who organized a secretly recorded cellphone dialog the next month when she put the allegations to Mr Beale.
Senior Constable Christina Tesoriero advised the jury on Tuesday that she had helped arrange the decision, often called a pretext name, however was not current when it was made.
She mentioned she additionally didn’t see notes made by the lady earlier than the decision by which the jury have been advised the lady wrote “convince him he’s guilty and not innocent”.
Constable Tesoriero was grilled over what Mr Beale’s barrister, Margaret Cunneen SC, described as a pursuit of key witnesses solely after he was charged.
“You had not even interviewed the two employees who had been in the bathroom at the same time as Mr Beale until after he was charged,” Ms Cunneen mentioned.
“Can I suggest to you that you made the arrest and charged (Mr Beale) first, and investigated later… They were pretty important witnesses, weren’t they?”
Constable Tesoriero admitted she had been a plain garments detectives for under 4 months, and that the CCTV footage had differed from the lady’s assertion.
She additionally gave proof about one other man who had interactions with Mr Beale exterior the toilet, who police have been unable to find earlier than the trial.
Critically, Ms Cunneen questioned whether or not Constable Tesoriero whether or not police investigated the three parts of the offence: the act, consent, and information of consent.
Opening the defence case, Ms Cunneen mentioned: “If a person accused of (sexual assault) doesn’t know there is no consent or misread the situation, it cannot be proven.
She later added that: “If you’re not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt (the woman) is an honest and accurate witness … you could never find that he is guilty.”
Ms Cunneen known as simply two witnesses within the defence case, which she mentioned went to Mr Beale’s character: his mother-in-law and Mr Moses, his former supervisor.
Mr Moses described Mr Beale as having the “biggest heart of all the players I’ve managed”, and mentioned the allegations had “huge effect” on his profession and “hurt him a lot”.
For her half, Mr Beale’s mother-in-law mentioned the rugby star was a “good man with a good heart”.
She mentioned that whereas the alleged sexual acts had been “hurtful”, Mr Beale had made a mistake and that she believed him when she mentioned it was consensual.
Constable Tesoriero additionally advised the jury that folks current within the bar on the time of the alleged incident have been contacted to offer statements, various whom declined.
Mr Beale’s lawyer, Margaret Cunneen, beforehand argued that the alleged act was consensual and the lady had made the grievance to achieve “sympathy” from her fiance.
Friends and household of the alleged sufferer gave proof on Monday in regards to the girl’s frame of mind after the evening in addition to an argument along with her fiance.
The trial will proceed on Wednesday.
Source: www.news.com.au
