Letters: ‘My client is not a violent beast’

Friday November 29, 2019 Published in Letters to the Editor
Wilfred Dauvois and Norman George outside the court. 19112254 Wilfred Dauvois and Norman George outside the court. 19112254

Dear editor,

There is a common denominator in two spiky letters to the editor from Ellena Tavioni and Rangi Ngariki about my client and I showing our thumbs up after our trial victory – they are completely ignorant of what the facts are, but displayed outrage fueled entirely by emotion.


To begin with, my client faced three charges with a total imprisonment of 26 years. 

Our defence was there was sexual intercourse between two consenting adults. There were no party drugs and the complainant was fully awake and willing to participate in the sexual activities that occurred.  

The Police failed to do blood and urine tests when the complainant filed a complaint three days later.  

I did my own forensic investigations. As a result, I subpoenaed the head of the Rarotonga Hospital laboratory to testify. He confirmed drug residue can remain in the urine from 22 to 90 days. A urine test could have confirmed whether the complainant was party drugged or not.

The jury returned verdicts of not guilty to the rape and stupefying charge. The Crown withdrew the indecent assault charge before the jury retired for their verdict.  

After a tough fight to clear an innocent man facing 26 years of imprisonment, how are we supposed to react? 

For those good ladies advocating protection against sexual and domestic violence … attend court hearings to hear the evidence or call me to explain the facts, I won’t mind, we are on the same side, I am against domestic violence!  

Note the other charge of common assault against my client is a minor technical charge to be heard by a single JP.   

My client is also created by God and two loving parents; he is not a violent beast as inferred from Rangi Ngariki.

Your sincerely,

Norman George
Barrister and solicitor

Leave a comment