Two men accused of sexually assaulting a drunk woman after picking her up from a nightclub in Darwin, NT
Consensus Summary
Two men, Panormitis Charalampis and Michael Vrouvis, were accused of sexually assaulting a woman they picked up while she waited for an Uber outside Mayberry nightclub in Darwin on January 14 2024. The woman, who had been drinking heavily, was taken to her apartment where the men remained for over eight hours. Prosecutors argued she was too intoxicated to consent, citing her BAC of 0.1-0.15 or 0.2, fragmented memory, and CCTV footage showing her struggling to walk. Both men testified the encounters were consensual, with Charalampis claiming she initiated sex and Vrouvis initially refusing due to her intoxication. The trial focused on consent and the menâs awareness of her incapacity, with defence lawyers arguing the womanâs memory gaps did not prove incapacity. After seven hours of deliberation, the jury acquitted both men, finding reasonable doubt about her ability to consent or their awareness of it.
â 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 Darwinâs CBD at around 3:30am
- The woman ordered an Uber but was picked up by Charalampis and Vrouvis outside the nightclub, believing they were her Uber drivers
- The men took the woman to her apartment and remained there for over eight hours (8.5 hours per Article 2)
- The womanâs blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was estimated between 0.1 and 0.15 when she reached her apartment block (Article 1) or between 0.1 and 0.2 (Article 3)
- CCTV footage showed the woman struggling to walk and needing assistance after being picked up (Articles 1, 2, and 3)
- The woman testified her memory was fragmented with 'black spots' and she was 'in and out of consciousness' during the assaults (Articles 1 and 3)
- Both men pleaded not guilty, maintaining the sexual encounters were consensual (Articles 1, 2, and 3)
- Panormitis Charalampis testified he felt a 'duty' to ensure the woman got home safely and claimed she initiated sexual activity (Articles 1 and 3)
- The trial took place in the Northern Territory Supreme Court in Darwin (Articles 1, 2, and 3)
Points of Difference
Details reported by only one source:
- Panormitis Charalampis testified through a translator, stating he could 'understand English more than I can speak it' (Article 1)
- Crown Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt questioned Charalampis on whether he understood the word 'gross' when the woman allegedly said it to him (Article 1)
- Michael Vrouvis declined to testify, with his friend Jimmy Parimeros stating Vrouvis initially refused sex due to her intoxication but later agreed (Article 1)
- Justice Judith Kelly explicitly stated the womanâs memory of being 'carried' by the men was 'completely wrong' and 'unreliable' (Article 2)
- Family members of the men became 'audibly emotional' and 'broke into audible tears' during the verdict announcement (Article 2)
- Defence lawyer Stephen Robson SC said 'justice was done' outside court after the verdict (Article 2)
- Crown Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt described the womanâs intoxication as 'in the high to severe range' (Article 1)
- CCTV footage showed Charalampis getting into the back seat of the car after pushing the woman (Article 1)
Contradictions
Conflicting information between sources:
- Article 1 states the womanâs BAC was between 0.1 and 0.15 when she reached her apartment block, while Article 3 states it was between 0.1 and 0.2
- Article 1 reports the womanâs BAC was 'in the high to severe range' (0.1-0.15), but Article 3 does not explicitly classify it as 'high to severe'
- Article 1 states the woman âpassed out in the car and required assistance walking,â while Article 3 describes her as âcrawling and falling out of a car, laying on the ground, unable to walk without being carriedâ (slightly different phrasing)
- Article 1 reports the trial lasted seven days, while Article 2 states it lasted two weeks (though both agree on the seven-hour jury deliberation)
- Article 3 states the woman âdidnât know how longâ the sexual encounters lasted, while Article 1 states the assaults occurred âover more than eight hoursâ (Article 2 specifies 8.5 hours)
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....