WARNING: Graphic content
An emotional Jarryd Hayne walked outside the courthouse - hand-in-hand with his wife Amellia - after being found guilty of two counts of sexual assault.
He struggled to speak to the awaiting media scrum for several seconds as tears welled in his eyes, before saying that he told the truth.
“I did not cover up evidence, I did not lie,” he said
Asked if he would appeal the decision, he said “yes”.
A jury has found ex-NRL star Jarryd Hayne guilty of sexually assaulting a woman four-and-a-half years ago.
The 35-year-old had pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual intercourse without consent relating to the 2018 NRL Grand Final night.
After eight days of deliberating, the jury was asked to give their verdict on each count, to which one juror read out: “guilty”.
As the verdict was read out, Hayne’s wife Amellia put her head in her hands and cried, while other supporters also became emotional.
Once the jury was discharged, Hayne stood up and walked over to his wife and mother to embrace them.
Jury’s question before verdict
Earlier, the jury asked the judge a question after more than a week of deadlock deliberations.
On Tuesday afternoon, the NSW District Court heard they sent a note to Judge Graham Turnbull SC which read: “Dear Your Honour, we’ve taken another vote, and while we have made progress, we are not at a unanimous decision. We would like to clarify if ignorance of the law is a sufficient defence.”
The 35-year-old former NRL star has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual intercourse without consent relating to an alleged incident on the night of the 2018 NRL Grand Final.
In response to the jury’s note, Judge Turnbull told them that the “short answer is no”, but that the facts of this case show there is a little more nuance to that.
“In this case, you must remember the burden of proof is on the Crown and the accused does not have to prove anything,” Judge Turnbull said.
“Neither the accused nor the complainant misunderstood that it was anything but illegal to force yourself on a woman without her consent, whether it be digitally or orally.
“It’s no part of the accused’s evidence that he did not know that it was illegal to have digital or oral intercourse with someone without consent. He has given an explanation and I remind you that if you accept that explanation as true or possibly true, that constitutes reasonable doubt and he’s entitled to be acquitted.”
Judge Turnbull told them they have to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.
He reminded them it was the Crown’s case there was “never any consent to any sexual activity,” and that was conveyed by words and conduct explicitly to Hayne.
Judge’s message to jury
Earlier on Tuesday, Judge Turnbull told the jury to focus only on what was said within “these four walls” and asked them to communicate any issues.
Turnbull’s lengthy message came a day after he made a “Black Direction” asking them to reconsider the votes of a few jurors.
That direction was made in response to their note saying they had been unable to reach a decision despite lengthy discussion.
He asked them to persevere and to be confident that they could let the court know if they were “having trouble being unanimous”.
He told the jury they had been diligent for some days and he did not want to encourage them to take any particular course, but reminded them they could ask for guidance if needed.
Judge Turnbull also gave a direction about avoiding stereotypes, at the request of defence barrister Margaret Cunneen SC.
“You must only have regard to the evidence in the trial — I’ve said that many times — nothing beyond these four walls,” he said.
“You must be true to your oaths and affirmations... Being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt does not mean it is more likely than not. It is not enough to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities — what is what is required is proof beyond reasonable doubt.”
The jury heard that if there is an issue, they should communicate that with the court. But they were told that message should not be seen as putting any pressure on them.
“You are the only ones to have heard and seen all the evidence and therefore it’s what you make of the evidence which is the touch stone,” Judge Turnbull said.
“The verdict is guilty or not guilty, not guilty or innocent.”
The jury of six men and six women retired to deliberate about 3:30pm on Monday, March 27.
Night in question
During the 11-day trial, Crown prosecutor John Sfinas argued that a woman was sexually assaulted after Hayne stopped by her house on the outskirts of Newcastle on September 30, on his way back to Sydney from a boozy buck’s weekend.
The court heard the woman decided she did not want to have sex with Hayne after she realised a taxi was waiting outside.
But Hayne told the court the digitally penetrative and oral acts were consensual, he was “shocked” when he realised he was covered in the woman’s blood and said he accidentally clipped her with his finger.
The trial heard the pair had chatted on social media for two weeks leading up to September 30 but had not met in person.
It heard Hayne had invited the woman to meet him out the night before while he was at a party during the bucks’ weekend, but she declined. She instead invited him for coffee or breakfast the next morning.
The court heard when Hayne arrived at the woman’s house shortly after 9pm the next night, her mother had answered the door.
According to Hayne’s evidence, the mother directed him to the bedroom, where he felt awkward as the woman was shy, despite having sent sexual and suggestive texts.
He said he tried to break the ice by putting a few of his “go-to” songs on YouTube, including Ed Sheeran’s cover of Oasis’ song ‘Wonderwall’.
The court was told that a short time later, the front door was knocked on by the taxi driver. Hayne had told her he was only going to the house to pick up a bag.
Hayne told the court he then went out to watch some of the NRL Grand Final with the woman’s mother before coming back into the bedroom, when the Crown argued the alleged assault — which Hayne strenuously denies — occurred.
Throughout the trial, Judge Turnbull urged the jury to avoid stereotypes and preconceived ideas when making their decision.
Judge Graham Turnbull gave a lengthy message to the jury on Tuesday morning, the day after he made a “Black Direction” asking them to reconsider the votes of a few jurors.
That direction was made in response to their note saying they had been unable to reach a decision despite lengthy discussion.
The 35-year-old former-NRL star has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual intercourse without consent relating to an alleged incident on the night of the 2018 NRL Grand Final.
During the 11-day NSW District Court trial, Crown prosecutor John Sfinas argued that a woman was sexually assaulted after Hayne stopped by her house on the outskirts of Newcastle on September 30, on his way back to Sydney from a boozy buck’s weekend.
The court heard the woman decided she did not want to have sex with Hayne after she realised a taxi was waiting outside.
But Hayne told the court the penetrative and oral acts were consensual, he was “shocked” when he realised he was covered in the woman’s blood and said he accidentally clipped her with his finger.
The jury of six men and six women retired to deliberate about 3:30pm on Monday, March 27.
They deliberated until Friday and returned on Monday, when they gave a note to Judge Graham Turnbull saying that they were unable to reach a decision and sought guidance on how to proceed.
In response, Judge Turnbull gave the “Black Direction,” saying experience has shown a jury can often make a decision after having more time.
But having not received a further note from the jury by Tuesday morning, Judge Turnbull called the jury back into the courtroom.
He emphasised what he said yesterday about persevering and asked them to be confident that they could let the court know if they were “having trouble being unanimous”.
He told the jury they had been diligent for some days and he did not want to encourage them to take any particular course, but reminded them they could ask for guidance if needed.
Judge Turnbull also gave a direction about avoid making stereotypes, at the request of defence barrister Margaret Cunneen SC.
“You must only have regard to the evidence in the trial — I’ve said that many times — nothing beyond these fall walls,” he said.
“You must be true to your oaths and affirmations... Being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt does not mean it is more likely than not. It is not enough to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities — what is what is required is proof beyond reasonable doubt.”
The jury heard that if there is an issue, they should communicate that with the court. But they were told that message should not be seen as putting any pressure on them.
“You are the only ones to have heard and seen all the evidence and therefore it’s what you make of the evidence which is the touch stone,” Judge Turnbull said.
“The verdict is guilty or not guilty, not guilty or innocent.”
Night in question
The trial heard the pair had chatted on social media for two weeks leading up to September 30 but had not met in person.
It heard Hayne had invited the woman to meet him out the night before while he was at a party during the bucks’ weekend, but she declined. She instead invited him for coffee or breakfast the next morning.
