ACT News


Bashed man 'too drunk' to know assailant

A man who allegedly had his face stomped upon for 10 minutes at his Ainslie Village unit told police there was ''blood everywhere'' when he called triple-0, a court has heard.

Wayne Michael Connors, 31, is accused of taking part in the bashing of Christopher William Hoskins, 34, after a night drinking at Krave nightclub in Civic in June 2011.

Mr Hoskins had invited three men described as ''so-called friends'' - Connors, Lawrence Cross, 27, and an unidentified man - to his place after Krave closed, the court heard.

The Crown alleges that Mr Hoskins went to the toilet, and came back to find the unidentified man had stashed his laptop under his shirt.

Mr Hoskins challenged him, trying to take the laptop back. But he was allegedly punched in the face, prompting a scuffle.

The alleged victim told the court that he felt as though he was winning the scuffle, when Connors booted him in the face.


The Crown alleges that Mr Hoskins was then repeatedly kicked and had his face stomped upon for at least 10 minutes, leaving him with serious injuries.

His unit was then allegedly ''ransacked'', with clothing, a phone, a wallet and video games taken.

The three men left and allegedly told Mr Hoskins that they would kill him if he went to the police. The court heard the triple-0 call made by Mr Hoskins just after the alleged attack.

In it he names two of the three alleged attackers, and asks for an ambulance. He told police he was ''pretty badly beat up'', and said to the triple-0 operator, ''there's blood everywhere, mate''.

But the defence claims that Wayne Michael Connors was never in the apartment, and that Mr Hoskins was disoriented, drunk, and confused about who was in the room. Mr Hoskins told the court he rated his level of drunkenness at eight or nine out of 10 on the night.

The court heard that forensics found nothing linking Connors to the apartment, despite Mr Hoskins' claim the three men were smoking and sharing alcohol beforehand.

The defence said there were holes in Mr Hoskins' version of events and that ''huge chunks'' of time appeared to be missing from his recollection of the night. Connors' lawyer suggested Mr Hoskins was fibbing, playing up the accused's role, and changing evidence to suit his version of events.

The defence said the case came down to a ''word-on-word dispute'' between the accused and the alleged victim.

The trial of Connors continues on Tuesday morning. He is charged with aggravated robbery and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.