Accused rapist lied and lied, court told

A MAN who allegedly raped a sickly homeless man in his caravan told police three different versions of events, suggesting a “complete lack of credibility”, a Perth judge has heard.

Garry Narkle, 55, is on trial in the District Court charged with six offences including sexual penetration without consent and indecent assault.

Mr Narkle has pleaded not guilty.

The prosecution alleges Mr Narkle met his 39-year-old victim at a bank ATM late on a Saturday night in January 2009 and invited him back to his Queens Park caravan. There, Mr Narkle provided the ill and homeless man with mugs of port and his own medication before demanding sex, the court was told.

Prosecutor Janet Whitbread said the man was threatened by Mr Narkle and was too weak to defend himself from being repeatedly raped throughout the night. Ms Whitbread said that when police interviewed Mr Narkle over the allegations, he gave three different versions of events in a matter of hours.  “Nr Narkle’s litany of lies suggests a complete lack of credibility,” she said in her closing submission today.

“In the first version given by Mr Narkle, it is clearly a complete lie that they only spent 10 minutes together at a Commonwealth Bank and he never sees him again,” she said. Ms Whitbread said that when Mr Narkle was questioned an hour later about evidence that showed the victim had been in his caravan, he changed his story. “In that hour, Mr Narkle’s mind was working overtime and came up with a version which accounted for (the man’s) presence at the campervan without anything being wrong,” she said.

“Mr Narkle says the complainant is a perfectly nice bloke and gives no evidence whatsoever of him being a male prostitute.” When Mr Narkle was told his sperm showed up in rectal, anal and peri-anal swabs of the man, he changed his story again, Ms Whitbread said. “The complainant has then gone from being a nice bloke to a gay prostitute within 50 minutes,” she said.  “He says they were both drinking alcohol and taking pills and engaged in consensual sexual behaviour on at least two occasions.”

Defence barrister Simon Watters said a guilty verdict would rely heavily on the victim’s version of events, but his evidence could not be entirely trusted. Mr Watters said the man’s evidence was inconsistent and his character was different from what he was trying to portray.  “He’s seeking to portray himself as a vulnerable, sick, unwell, homeless man taken advantage of and that’s not supported,” he told the court.

Mr Watters said it was unbelievable the man would not defend himself from being sexually assaulted in view of his allegedly violent past and claims that he reacted aggressively when provoked.  Judge Philip Eaton is due to deliver his verdict on Friday, May 28.

Leave a Reply