Rape convictions against former NRL star overturned after successful appeal

Former NRL star Jarryd Hayne has successfully had his conviction for raping a woman in her Newcastle home overturned.

The two-time Dally M winner was found guilty of sexually abusing the woman at her home in Newcastle in the Hunter region of New South Wales following a high-profile District Court trial last year.

It was the third time Hayne had been tried for the same incident and the second time he had been found guilty.

Hayne, 36, continued to maintain his innocence and immediately appealed his conviction in the state Supreme Court.

Hayne claims the sex was entirely consensual, but the jury accepted the woman’s version of events that she repeatedly said “no” and “stop” and was left bleeding after he took off her pants.

On Wednesday, the former Parramatta Eels fullback appeared in the New South Wales Supreme Court wearing a green tracksuit issued to him from prison and wearing a weary expression as he awaited the outcome of his appeal.

Judge Stephen Rothman allowed the appeal on two of the three grounds raised by Haynes’ defense.

Haynes’ appeal was based on three grounds: first, the verdicts were unreasonable and not supported by evidence at trial; second, the trial judge erred in ruling that the plaintiff did not need to provide evidence of an interaction in 2021 with the man she messaged on the same day the jury found she had been sexually assaulted in 2018; and third, the judge’s decision resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the second ground and overturned Haynes’ rape convictions.

“The court will vacate the convictions and order a new trial,” Judge Rothman said.

“Whether there will be a new trial is a matter for the Attorney General.”

During the appeal in April, his lawyers argued that the messages the woman he was found guilty of raping deleted from her phone could be key to the former star’s acquittal.

Tim Game SC, representing Hayne, told the court his client should be acquitted rather than face a fourth trial.

He argued that the woman, whose identity cannot be verified for legal reasons, had concealed text messages and social media messages indicating that she had consented.

The messages refer to a Snapchat conversation she had with a friend she had never met in person.

The plaintiff sent messages to her friend before and after meeting Hayne, telling her about the sexual contact but not saying that it was not consensual.

Mr Game argued that concealment was “the same as lying or deceiving” and said the woman had concealed evidence “on a large scale”.

He said concealing the facts had been “central” in the defence’s case, but there had been a miscarriage of justice when District Judge Graham Turnbull SC ruled the defence could not cross-examine the witness about her deleted or undisclosed messages with a man and a woman before and after the incident.

Haynes’s lawyers attempted to rely on the messages to suggest that the victim “intentionally concealed her communications because … they did not support her version of events and then (possibly) attempted to influence her regarding her testimony.”

The court was told that the woman had heard Haynes’ previous appeal in 2021 and had contacted her social media friend on Facebook on the same day.

“I hope this was worth it for you,” read the message.

“The pain I’ve endured through all of this is unfathomable. I never lied. I never did anything to you, and you writing to JH about me inviting him to visit doesn’t excuse what happened.

“I didn’t tell you because it was disgusting and confusing to me. When he comes out, you can thank yourself. This was the hardest and most painful thing I’ve ever been through, and you can thank yourself for helping a guilty man.”

Haynes’s lawyers argue that the messages were relevant to the plaintiff’s credibility and showed that she had contacted a witness in a “hostile manner.”

They argued that the woman “may” have had the intention of influencing the witness’ testimony.

During the appeal, Mr Game said the cover-up showed she wanted to get rid of evidence, which was “hurtful”, but also that it showed she was “actually consenting”.

He told the court: “This is evidence of their dishonesty and it is also about their credibility in general.”

But prosecutor Georgina Wright SC told the court that the plaintiff did not tell the woman about the attack because they did not know each other well.

“She had never met her and said she didn’t know her well at all,” Ms Wright said.

Ms Wright told the court that the plaintiff told close friends and family about the attack in the hours following the incident.

However, she argued that the Facebook message to the social media friend was “consistent with an expression of frustration with the legal process” and disputed the claim that the plaintiff was hiding messages from police.

Hayne was sentenced to four years and nine months in prison on charges of digital and oral sexual assault, but will be eligible for parole in May 2025 as he has already served time in custody.

The verdict on appeal will be announced later on Wednesday.