← Back to Stories

Two men acquitted of raping intoxicated woman picked up while waiting for Uber in Darwin

1 hours ago3 articles from 1 source

Consensus Summary

A jury in the Northern Territory Supreme Court acquitted Panormitis Charalampis and Michael Vrouvis of all charges related to the sexual assault of a young woman they picked up while she waited for an Uber outside Mayberry nightclub in Darwin on January 14 2024. The case hinged on consent, with prosecutors arguing the woman was severely intoxicated with a blood alcohol concentration between 0.1 and 0.15, rendering her incapable of freely agreeing to sexual activity. CCTV footage showed her struggling to walk and needing assistance, while her testimony described fragmented memory and periods of unconsciousness. The defence countered that the woman initiated sexual contact and that her intoxication did not render her incapable of consent, pointing to her behaviour in the apartment—including asking for their phone numbers and sharing a cigarette—as evidence she did not believe she was being assaulted. After two weeks of trial and nearly seven hours of deliberation, the jury unanimously acquitted both men, with defence lawyer Stephen Robson SC declaring justice was done. The verdict sparked emotional reactions from the men’s family members, while the prosecution had argued the men took advantage of a vulnerable woman in a predatory manner.

✓ Verified by 2+ sources

Key details reported by multiple sources:

  • Panormitis Charalampis and Michael Vrouvis were charged with four counts each of sexual intercourse without consent in the Northern Territory Supreme Court
  • The incident occurred on January 14, 2024, outside Mayberry nightclub in Darwin’s CBD at approximately 3:30am
  • The woman was picked up by the men while waiting for an Uber and taken to her apartment block, where she remained for eight-and-a-half hours
  • CCTV footage showed the woman crawling and falling out of the car, needing assistance to walk, and later walking across the road to get into the car
  • The woman’s blood alcohol concentration was estimated between 0.1 and 0.15 (high to severe intoxication) when she reached her apartment block
  • The woman’s memory of the night was described as fragmented, with black spots and periods of being in and out of consciousness
  • Both men pleaded not guilty, with the defence arguing all sexual activity was consensual
  • The trial lasted two weeks, with closing arguments delivered by Crown Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt and defence lawyers Beth Wild and Stephen Robson SC
  • The jury deliberated for almost seven hours before acquitting both men on all charges on Friday

Points of Difference

Details reported by only one source:

ABC News
  • Family members of Charalampis and Vrouvis became audibly emotional as the jury delivered the verdicts, with both men bowing their heads
  • Defence lawyer Stephen Robson SC stated outside court that 'justice was done' after the verdict
  • Justice Judith Kelly reminded the jury that the woman’s behaviour (including walking naked onto a balcony and sharing a cigarette) was inconsistent with her claiming the men were rapists
  • The defence argued the woman’s behaviour demonstrated she did not believe the men were rapists at the time, including asking for their phone number and arranging a date
  • The prosecution characterised the woman’s account as 'elaborate and extensive sexual interactions' with both men taking turns
  • The defence lawyer Beth Wild represented Panormitis Charalampis, while James Stuchbery also represented the men

Contradictions

Conflicting information between sources:

  • Article 1 states the woman’s memory was 'completely wrong' regarding CCTV showing her walking across the road, while Article 2 does not explicitly contradict this but focuses more on the prosecution’s narrative
  • Article 1 mentions the defence argued the woman ‘may have regretted the night and conceived a different narrative,’ while Article 3 does not explicitly mention this phrasing but focuses on the defence’s claim she ‘couldn’t distinguish between memory gaps and passing out’
  • Article 1 states the defence lawyer Beth Wild represented Panormitis Charalampis, while Article 3 does not mention Beth Wild’s representation but lists James Stuchbery and Beth Wild as defence lawyers for Charalampis (likely a redundancy in Article 1)
  • Article 1 notes the defence argued the woman ‘initiated sexual encounters with both men,’ while Article 3 states Charalampis testified the woman ‘grabbed his arm and pulled out my private parts’—a more specific claim of initiation
  • Article 2 states the defence maintains ‘all sexual activity on the night of January 14, 2024, was consensual,’ while Article 3 does not explicitly repeat this phrasing but focuses on Charalampis’s testimony of duty and initiation

Source Articles

ABC

Man accused of raping woman in her apartment testifies 'she wasn't that drunk'

Panormitis Charalampis, co-accused of picking up an intoxicated young woman from outside a nightclub while she was waiting for an uber and sexually assaulting her at her apartment, took the stand, und...

25 March 2026
ABC

Jury clears men accused of raping intoxicated woman waiting for an Uber

Two men accused of raping a young woman they picked up while she waited for an Uber have been acquitted on all charges by a Northern Territory jury....

Yesterday
ABC

Trial of two men accused of rape in Darwin hears closing arguments

The jury in the trial of two men accused of picking up a young woman waiting for an Uber after a night out and raping her in her home has heard closing submissions....

25 March 2026