A Mitchell brothel employee was sexually assaulted in February 2021 by a Canberra man who was found guilty of the crime.
Darrell Michael Hudson, 31, was found guilty on Monday of 10 charges, including choking the victim, punching a hole in the wall, and sexual assault.
Three charges of unconsented sexual activity and three indecent acts were also added on the list of infractions. Regarding four of those accusations, he was found not guilty.
According to information provided to the ACT Supreme Court, Hudson consumed two lines of cocaine before visiting the Langtrees Bar and Brothel with a friend.
He claimed that the only reason he and his friend were there at the time was by chance.
He claimed that cocaine had a detrimental influence on his capacity for intercourse.
Attorney Anthony Williamson, however, informed the court that it was obvious Hudson had gone there for sex.
The couple reportedly entered the “Butterfly room” after 3am, according to information provided to the court.
The woman testified in court about how Hudson had carried out a number of behaviours that were either prohibited by the booking or extras that required payment.
He said in court that he had initially declined having intercourse and had instead preferred a “show” or a strip tease.
“His evidence defies believability,” Mr. Williamson added.
Mr. Williamson emphasised the fact that the man had consented to take a shower, which is often required in a reservation.
“If all you wanted was a strip show, why would you need a shower?” the jurors, Mr. Williamson enquired.
It is incomprehensible.
According to Mr. Williamson, the woman’s anxiety during her testimony was obvious, and she wasn’t sobbing crocodile tears.
The woman was informed by Hudson, according to the testimony given in court, “You are just a sl** paid to do a job.”
But Hudson’s attorney Katrina Musgrove insisted to the jurors that her client was innocent.
“You might not agree with what he said there,”
She countered, however, that just because some jury members didn’t like it doesn’t indicate he is lying.
She asked the jury to believe his account of how he arrived there.
“It’s not that he wanted to go to the brothel,” Ms. Musgrove added.
He caved after his companion insisted that he visit the brothel.
She told the jury that when questioned if he was there to perform a service, he replied that he was the driver and added, “I’m not that desperate,” to his companion.
She deemed his justification, including his recollection of the earlier conversation, to be tenable.
“He was not told what was included,” Ms. Musgrove claimed.
“He was not informed of what was forbidden.”
She said that everything took place voluntarily.
The man’s hole in the wall was one of the case’s crucial components. Inside, his DNA was discovered.
Mr. Williamson said that he had done it in a fit of rage, and Hudson’s claim that he had done it out of fear of the club’s bikies coming after him was implausible given that the hole would have incensed them further.
According to Ms. Musgrove, Hudson was afraid by the bikers and struck the wall as a result because the door was being held closed.
She pleaded with the jury to accept his story.
Hudson’s bail was extended, and his sentencing has been postponed.
