Disgraced ex-Queensland Police officer Ross Kouimanis fails to overturn conviction for vile abuse of young boy
A predatory cop jailed for eight years for the heinous abuse of a young child more than two decades ago failed to persuade a court to overturn his convictions.
Former Queensland Police officer Ross Kouimanis was found guilty of a string of child abuse-related offenses – including repeated sexual intercourse with a child, aggravated indecent treatment, rape and assault occasioning bodily harm – following a District Court trial in November last year.
Kouimanis was once a highly respected Gold Coast traffic police officer and retired as a senior constable in 2009.
He was sentenced to eight years in prison in May.
But the disgraced police officer sought to overturn the court convictions, arguing that the trial judge made an error in his instructions to the jury.
He relied on a specific section of the Evidence Act (Qld) in relation to the delay in making a sexual offense complaint – specifically that a judge should not direct a jury to find that there should be no complaint “unless there is sufficient evidence to justify the delay” or that the delay relates to the credibility of the complainant.
Kouimanis argued that there was a miscarriage of justice because the trial judge – District Court Judge Dzenita Balić “failed to instruct the jury that the delay was related to the credibility of the complainant.”
During the trial, the court was told Koumanis abused the child for 2.5 years in the mid-to-late 1990s.
“The complainant claimed that various sexual acts were committed during this period,” the Court of Appeal said in its decision.
“It involved allegations of mutual touching, oral and anal penetration, as well as exposing the complainant to pornography.”
The child gave evidence that Koumanis physically assaulted her, verbally raped her, and acted inappropriately toward her in the early 2000s.
He did not file a police complaint until 2023.
Koumanis’ legal team argued at the hearing that the boy lied about the crime and that “revenge” was the probable motive.
The issue on appeal was whether there was “sufficient evidence to justify” the relevant instruction.
While the Queensland Court of Appeal rejected Koumanis’ appeal, it said the complaint, made nearly 20 years after the events, was “obvious” to the jury.
“Instead of focusing on the delay in filing a complaint with the police, (Koumanis)’s attorney focused on various allegations aimed at attacking the complainant’s credibility and trustworthiness,” the appeal decision states.
The court found that the assertion of the child’s alleged motive “does not provide a reasonable basis” to justify the court’s instruction that the 20-year delay was related to the child’s credibility.
The decision continues as follows: “A statement was made that the complainant was trying to suppress the incidents of abuse.”
“Had it been accepted by the jury, this would have provided an explanation for the delay in making a complaint to the police.”
Koumanis’ team argued that a key part of their case was not that the delay was inconsistent with the child’s statements, but that his “motivation to lie and conceal it” undermined the child’s credibility.
Part of the speech to the jury was about the child’s initial complaint.
“It is thus said that there is insufficient evidence to warrant an adverse referral for delay in the case,” the appellate judges said in their decision.
“It was argued that the potential false motive constituted a response to the potential just cause presented to the jury as an example of delay.”
However, the court said the evidence supporting the alleged lie was “insufficient” that the complainant had made “inconsistent statements” to colleagues.
Court of Appeal judges said the false allegation ground did not provide “some kind of specific response” to the boy’s statements that he was trying to “suppress” the abuse.
Koumanis’ appeal against the conviction was rejected.
