Trial of two men accused of rape in Darwin over alleged sexual assault of intoxicated woman picked up via Uber
Consensus Summary
Two men, Panormitis Charalampis and Michael Vrouvis, were accused of raping a woman they picked up while she waited for an Uber outside Darwin’s Mayberry nightclub on January 14 2024. The woman, in her 20s, had been drinking heavily and was severely intoxicated with a BAC estimated between 0.1 and 0.15 when she arrived at her apartment with the men. CCTV footage showed her struggling to walk and needing assistance, while her testimony described fragmented memory and feeling 'in no control whatsoever.' Both men pleaded not guilty, arguing the sexual encounters were consensual. Charalampis testified he felt a 'duty' to ensure her safety and claimed she initiated contact. The prosecution argued the men exploited her intoxication, while the defence highlighted inconsistencies in her memory and suggested she may have regretted the night. After nearly seven hours of deliberation, the jury acquitted both men, ruling there was reasonable doubt about whether she was incapable of consenting.
✓ 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, after the woman left Mayberry nightclub in Darwin’s CBD at approximately 3:30am
- The woman ordered an Uber but was picked up by the two men, who she believed were her Uber drivers, and taken to her apartment block
- CCTV footage shows the woman leaving Mayberry at 3:30am and being picked up by the men outside the nightclub
- The woman’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was estimated between 0.1 and 0.15 when she reached her apartment block with the men
- The trial lasted approximately two weeks, with closing arguments delivered by Crown Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt and defence lawyers James Stuchbery and Beth Wild
- The jury deliberated for nearly seven hours before delivering a verdict
- Both men pleaded not guilty to all charges, with the defence arguing the sexual activity was consensual
Points of Difference
Details reported by only one source:
- Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt described the woman as 'crawling and falling out of a car, laying on the ground, unable to walk without being carried by two men'
- The defence lawyer Beth Wild argued the woman 'couldn’t distinguish between memory gaps and passing out' and suggested she 'regretted' the night and 'conceived a different narrative'
- The defence lawyer James Stuchbery and Beth Wild argued the woman 'formed a false reality' about the night and that her memory gaps did not prove incapacity to consent
- The defence lawyer Beth Wild stated: 'This is not a case of lies and truth tellers, of a vulnerable woman and a predatory man, but an event capable of having different ways of how it is viewed'
- The defence lawyer Stephen Robson SC disputed the prosecution's claim the woman remained 'incapable of giving consent' at about 8am, stating: 'Ultimately the central issue comes down to whether she was so drunk as to be incapable, or whether she consented to sex because her inhibitions were low'
- The defence lawyer Beth Wild suggested the woman 'possibly regretted' the night and that 'two foreign guys in the apartment all day' was 'not reflecting well'
- The defence lawyer Beth Wild argued: 'It's not a straightforward tale of predatory Uber drivers. We've got a man who thought he had a nice moment with a beautiful woman...and a woman who perhaps can't remember much of what happened'
- The defence lawyer Beth Wild questioned why a man aware of a substantial risk that a woman hadn't been consenting would 'ask for her number three times and try to arrange a date'
Contradictions
Conflicting information between sources:
- Article 1 states the woman's BAC was between 0.2 and 0.1 when she arrived at the apartment, while Article 2 and 3 state it was between 0.1 and 0.15
- Article 1 reports the defence lawyer Beth Wild argued the woman 'couldn’t distinguish between memory gaps and passing out,' but Article 3 does not mention this specific argument
- Article 1 states the defence lawyer Beth Wild said: 'This is not a case of lies and truth tellers, of a vulnerable woman and a predatory man,' but Article 3 does not include this exact quote
- Article 1 reports the defence lawyer Beth Wild suggested the woman 'regretted' the night and 'conceived a different narrative,' but Article 2 does not explicitly mention this phrasing
- Article 1 states the defence lawyer Beth Wild argued the woman 'possibly regretted' the night, while Article 3 states the defence argued the woman 'was not so drunk as to be incapable of consenting' without mentioning regret
Source Articles
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....
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...
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....