Alexander Matters not guilty of ANU rape after ACT Supreme Court trial

Alexander Louis Christopher Matters, aged in his early 20s, was acquitted on Tuesday after four days of evidence in an ACT Supreme Court trial.

A jury found Matters not guilty of sexual intercourse without consent and committing an act of indecency without consent.

Matters worked as an electorate officer for Labor MP David Smith and was an Australian National University law student at the time in question.

The court previously heard the woman and Matters were not in a "boyfriend and girlfriend" relationship but would "hook up".

The prosecution had alleged that, in May 2021, the woman started to have consensual sex with Matters before asking him repeatedly to stop when he became "very rough" and she felt pain.

Matters was accused of continuing having sex with her and then non-consensually ejaculating on her chest. This was the subject of the act of indecency charge.

However, after about three hours deliberations, a jury cleared Matters.

The woman reported the alleged rape in September 2021 after seeing news articles stating Matters had been accused of a different sexual assault, over which charges have since been dropped.

In a statement on Tuesday, defence barrister Steven Whybrow SC said his client welcomed the verdicts and would like to "finally be able to move forward with his life".

"We wrote to the [ACT Director of Public Prosecutions] before the trial pointing out all the problems with this case with a view to avoid these two young people having to go through this traumatic experience unnecessarily," Mr Whybrow said.

"This is a case that did not need to go to trial."

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC declined to comment when contacted for a response.

The jury's verdicts on Tuesday followed closing addresses last week, when Mr Whybrow claimed there had been a "Law & Order moment" in the trial.

Mr Whybrow told the jury so-called Law & Order moments did not happen in real life, but "did in this trial".

He said one had occurred when the alleged victim agreed, while on the witness stand, with the proposition that Matters had asked her if he could ejaculate on her chest.

The woman agreed she had "begrudgingly" said yes.

The alleged victim also admitted she had previously told police in a recorded interview she had not given Matters consent to commit the act.

Mr Whybrow described the 45 seconds it took for the woman to admit what she said to police as "excruciating" and "like driving past a car crash when you can't look away".

In his closing address, the barrister told the jury voice messages the woman sent to Matters, saying "I want you to f---k me so hard" less than 24 hours after the alleged rape, were "utterly inconsistent" with the allegations.

He also claimed the woman had been an "outspoken advocate" for the #MeToo movement and it was "not a good look" for the woman to "be sleeping with somebody who is alleged as being a rapist".

"I have raised in my questions a motive to lie," Mr Whybrow said.

READ ALSO:

In her closing address, prosecutor Soraya Saikal-Skea told the jury there were "three key parts" to the evidence against Matters.

She said these were "blood, pain and messages".

"The blood and the pain tell a story of what occurred on that night," Ms Saikal-Skea said.

The prosecutor told the jury Facebook messages from the woman to Matters, saying she was "sore" and "I think you were too rough", supported the accusations.

"Those messages and the pain and the blood, I would suggest to you, are consistent that she did not consent to rough forceful sex on that night," Ms Saikal-Skea said.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: