Although he afterwards realized that massaging a youngster at his home was wrong, the founder of a Pentecostal church felt bad about it. He disputes the indecent assault for which a judge has found him responsible.
John McMartin, the 68-year-old founder of Inspire Church, was found guilty of indecent assault in March for an event that occurred at his house in southwest Sydney in January 2013 and involved a lady who was then 19 years old.
On an intense correctional order, he was given a community service sentence.
In an effort to overturn the conviction, McMartin’s attorney Philip Strickland SC told the NSW District Court on Tuesday that Inspire was a “tactile” church.
People frequently hugged and kissed one other and didn’t feel awkward, he claimed.
According to Strickland, the magistrate made decisions based on McMartin’s demeanor when he appeared in court that were unreasonable or denied him procedural justice.
The magistrate also disregarded McMartin’s repeated denials of caressing the woman while squeezing her breasts or rubbing his hand over her genitalia.
According to Strickland, he wasn’t shocked when she later complained, admitting the massage had been wrong and had made him feel bad.
The magistrate, according to Strickland, rejected his testimony because it was based on the “entirely inappropriate” determination that McMartin tried to downplay his behavior while presenting the evidence.
Strickland stated, “He doesn’t minimize his behavior; he accepts it.
McMartin eventually admitted that it was wrong for him to massage a teenage girl by himself at his house, but he continued to defend his actions.
“The (McMartin) denial is not implausible, and no evidence from outside sources contradicts it.
Naturally, the complaint disputes it, but no objective aspects do, according to Strickland.
Louise Thompson, an attorney for the prosecution, claimed that McMartin’s evidence was incongruous.
In the context of the young woman being alone in his house while he was intoxicated, he provided evidence that he wanted to be physically close to the complainant and took advantage of the chance for the massage, which he would not have offered in the workplace or in front of his wife.
Thompson responded, “And he’s saying there’s nothing sexual about it.
McMartin was also a lackluster witness, “simply guessing” a few of his responses and disputing with the prosecution, corroborating the magistrate’s assessment that his testimony was “underwhelming,” she claimed.
They are elements that, in my opinion, “jumped off the page,” remarked Thompson.
The fact that McMartin had occasionally argued with the prosecution’s attorneys and talked over his own counsel was merely a minor problem, according to Strickland.
Does that support the conclusion that he cannot be trusted on the crucial matter? said Strickland.
He also cast doubt on the accuracy of various claims the woman had made about the assault.
More information was provided in contemporaneous handwritten notes than in later sworn police statements, and Strickland implied that family members “played a material role” in the preparation of some statements.
Thompson claimed that the woman had acknowledged the contradictions in her earlier statements, which had been made over a period of years, and she had tried to suppress information about the indecent assault at the time.
On Friday, Judge Andrew Scotting is anticipated to rule on McMartin’s appeal.
