A former University of Canberra law lecturer convicted of sexually assaulting students suffers from brain damage that explains much of his behaviour towards the women, his lawyers argued Monday.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
An ACT Supreme Court jury found Arthur Marshall Hoyle, 68, guilty last year of raping one student, making unwanted advances on two others and showing another a pornographic PowerPoint slide.
He was sentenced to four years jail, with a non-parole period of two years and six months.
But this week Hoyle is appealing both the conviction and his jail sentence.
His lawyers argue, among other grounds, that fresh evidence of the man's mental impairment has emerged since the trial and that it provides a defence to some of the allegations.
Neurology professor Bruce Brew was called to give evidence at the appeal hearing before Chief Justice Helen Murrell, Justice John Burns and Additional Justice Anthony North.
The professor said Hoyle has traumatic frontal lobe damage as a result of injuries sustained when the man was younger.
He also said Hoyle suffers a degenerative or dementing brain condition.
Professor Brew said at the time of the offences it was likely Hoyle was unable to control his behaviour and likely that he misinterpreted social cues.
Professor Brew said Hoyle's condition would not necessarily be apparent to those around him.
"A lay person would not appreciate the impairment," he said, saying they might find Hoyle a "little odd" or "overly familiar".
Professor Brew told the ACT Court of Appeal Hoyle had "broadly" recognised his conduct was wrong but did not know it was unequivocally wrong.
"You can have an inkling," he said when Justice North pressed him on that conclusion, "but you don't know for certain it was wrong."
Prosecutor Shane Drumgold questioned the professor on the social cues Hoyle was said to have misinterpreted, pointing as one example to the pornographic PowerPoint slide he showed a student.
"He may not appreciate the gravity of showing pornographic material to his student, in his world that may be quite acceptable," the professor said.
The defence also relies on a report by Dr Jane Lonie, a neuropsychologist who found Hoyle suffered impairment of social and emotional aspects of his executive function.
Dr Lonie said Hoyle was suffering from brain disease that could have lead to inappropriate behaviour in social contexts and difficulty perceiving the emotions of others.
Hoyle, represented by counsel Tim Game SC, argues there was a miscarriage of justice in the man's trial.
His defence pointed to the fresh evidence of Hoyle's mental impairment, which was a possible defence to some of the allegations.
They say the allegations Hoyle touched the students' legs and arms and what were described by the students as attempts to kiss them is consistent with his mental impairment.
In the case of the most serious complaints, the two rapes, the defence have raised questions around the credibility of the student.
The defence have also argued that there were problems with the tendency evidence allowed at trial.
The Crown says that none of the grounds of the appeal are made out and that there has been no miscarriage of justice.
The offences happened in Hoyle's office in April 2015, after he invited the students in to discuss allegations of cheating in their essays. The victims were all women and international students.
The appeal continues.
