← Back to Stories

Northern Territory Supreme Court trial of two men accused of rape after picking up intoxicated woman for Uber

2 hours ago2 articles from 1 source

Consensus Summary

Two Greek men, Panormitis Charalampis and Michael Vrouvis, faced trial in the Northern Territory Supreme Court after being accused of raping a woman they picked up while she waited for an Uber outside Darwin’s Mayberry nightclub on January 14 2024. Both pleaded not guilty, with the defence arguing all sexual activity was consensual despite the woman’s severe intoxication—her blood alcohol level estimated between 0.2 and 0.1 when she arrived at her apartment. CCTV footage showed her leaving the club at 3:30am and being taken to her home by the men, who she believed were her Uber drivers. The prosecution highlighted her testimony of being ‘in no control whatsoever’ and ‘in and out of consciousness,’ while the defence emphasized memory gaps and inconsistent behaviour, such as walking naked on a balcony. After two weeks of evidence, including testimony from the woman’s family and an expert witness, a jury acquitted both men on all charges, concluding there was reasonable doubt about her capacity to consent. The verdict hinged on whether her intoxication rendered her incapable of consent or if her fragmented memory created doubt. Outside court, the men’s families expressed relief, with defence lawyer Stephen Robson declaring ‘justice was done.’

✓ 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, when the men picked up a woman waiting for an Uber outside Darwin nightclub Mayberry at approximately 3:30am
  • CCTV footage shows the woman leaving Mayberry at 3:30am and being picked up by the men, who she believed were her Uber drivers
  • The woman was in her 20s at the time and her alcohol level was estimated between 0.2 and 0.1 when she arrived at her apartment with the men
  • The men were acquitted on all charges after nearly seven hours of jury deliberation
  • The trial lasted two weeks and included testimony from the woman’s mother, housemate, and expert witness Jane Goodman-Delahunty

Points of Difference

Details reported by only one source:

ABC News
  • Defence lawyer Beth Wild argued the woman ‘truly believed’ she was having a ‘nice moment’ with Charalampis and questioned why he would remain at her property if he knew she wasn’t consenting
  • Prosecutor Rebecca Everitt described the woman’s testimony as fragmented due to ‘severe intoxication’ but recalled being ‘in no control whatsoever’ and ‘in and out of consciousness’
  • Defence lawyer James Stuchbery and Beth Wild argued the woman’s memory gaps did not prove incapacity to consent, suggesting she may have ‘regretted’ the night and fabricated a narrative
  • Prosecutor Everitt stated the men ‘knew they had managed to find an attractive, very drunk woman’ and ‘had an opening to take advantage of that situation’
  • The defence highlighted the woman’s behaviour—including walking naked onto a balcony and sharing a cigarette—was inconsistent with believing she was being raped
  • Justice Judith Kelly noted the CCTV showed the woman walking across the road and getting into the car, contradicting her claim of being carried

Contradictions

Conflicting information between sources:

  • Article 1 states the woman ‘was crawling and falling out of a car, laying on the ground, unable to walk without being carried by two men’ but Article 2 omits this specific description
  • Article 1 reports the woman said ‘I don’t know how long that lasted, it just felt like it kept going’ about the sexual encounters, while Article 2 characterizes it as ‘elaborate and extensive’ without direct quote
  • Article 1 describes the defence arguing the woman ‘formed a false reality about the night,’ while Article 2 does not mention this phrasing but focuses on ‘regretted the night’
  • Article 1 includes the defence lawyer Beth Wild’s statement that the woman ‘couldn’t distinguish between memory gaps and passing out,’ but Article 2 does not repeat this exact phrasing
  • Article 1 mentions the defence lawyer James Stuchbery as part of the defence team, but Article 2 only lists Stephen Robson SC and Beth Wild

Source Articles

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
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....

27 March 2026