Judge who presided over Jarryd Hayne’s rape conviction appeal drops bombshell claim on the former NRL star’s guilt

One of the judges who presided over Jarryd Hayne’s successful appeal against his rape convictions has concluded there is a “significant possibility” the NRL player is “innocent”.

Hayne was released from prison on Wednesday after the Court of Criminal Appeal quashed his convictions for two counts of sexual intercourse without consent.

The two-time Dally M winner was found guilty of digitally and verbally sexually assaulting a woman in her Newcastle home following a high-profile trial in the NSW District Court last year.

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

Mr Hayne claims the sexual encounter was entirely consensual, but the jury accepted the woman’s version of events, namely that she repeatedly said ‘no’ and ‘stop’ and bled after he took off her trousers.

He maintained his innocence and appealed the convictions, which were upheld in a 2-1 majority decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal this week.

The appeal was based on three grounds: first, the sentences were unreasonable and not supported by evidence, second, the judge had erred in ruling that the complainant did not have to provide evidence about an interaction in 2021 with two people she had sent a message on the day of the trial. alleged sexual assault in 2018, and finally that the judge’s ruling resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

In her part of the ruling, Judge Deborah Sweeney disagreed with the majority in proposing to uphold the first ground of appeal that argued the jury’s guilty verdict was unreasonable.

She suggested that Hayne should be acquitted of both counts of sexual intercourse without consent, but accepted that she held the minority view.

The High Court judge claimed that Mr Hayne’s guilty pleas were unreasonable because it was ‘not sufficiently clear that (the woman) did not consent to the two sexual acts that took place, or, if she did not, that (Mr Hayne)) knew that.’

“Based on my own assessment of the quality and sufficiency of the evidence, I have reasonable doubt that the applicant committed the offenses charged,” she alleged.

“I believe there is a significant likelihood that an innocent person has been convicted.”

Judge Anthony Meagher, on the other hand, found that the appeal should have been dismissed on all grounds because the jury could have been satisfied ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ as to Mr Hayne’s guilt.

Judge Stephen Rothman agreed with Judge Sweeney that grounds two and three should be upheld.

They were convinced that the judge, Judge Graham Turnbull SC, had erred in ruling that the complainant did not have to give evidence about her interactions with two people on the day of the alleged rape in 2018.

The court found that the ruling, combined with a direction given by Judge Turnbull SC to the jury regarding the communications, had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

“The jury was deprived of evidence meaningful to their assessment of the complainant’s honesty,” Judge Sweeney said.

“By not allowing counsel to question the complainant on these topics and then telling the jury that in considering the allegation that the complainant had lied about matters such as deleting her phone, they should consider whether that” reasonable’, this created unfairness in the trial against the suspect.’

In allowing the appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeal ordered a new trial, noting that the decision on a fourth trial would ultimately fall to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Judge Sweeney said she does not believe Hayne should face a fourth trial over the rape allegations.

“I am of the opinion that, in the circumstances of the history of this case, it would not be in the interests of justice to try the applicant a fourth time,” she said.

Judge Rothman noted that Hayne had been to prison twice and spent “significant time in prison” before his convictions were overturned.

Following his third trial, Mr Hayne was taken into custody on April 14 last year and spent almost 14 months in custody before being released on bail on Wednesday.

He would be eligible for parole in May next year.

“Under the current circumstances, it is unlikely that a retrial will take place before the expiration of the non-parole period, and the majority of that period has already been served,” Judge Rothman said.

In a statement, the prosecutor said it would consider the court’s decision.

“Any decision regarding a potential retrial will be made in accordance with prosecutorial guidelines,” a spokesperson said.

Jarryd Hayne’s lawyer says her client is happy to return to his family after his rape convictions were quashed by the Court of Criminal Appeal on June 12, 2024.

This week’s successful appeal marks the second time Mr Hayne has successfully won an appeal after his convictions were quashed in 2022.

The former Parramatta Eels full-back was released from prison on Wednesday evening, wearing beige trousers and a white shirt as he rushed to a waiting area.

He was ordered to forfeit a $20,000 bond and was ordered not to stalk, harass or contact the alleged victim or witnesses.

The former Parramatta Eels full-back will live with his wife and is banned from approaching an international departure point or applying for a new passport.

He returns to the NSW District Court next month to hear whether he will face a fourth trial.