Christian Porter Denies Rape Allegation by Colin Ector

Christian Porter Denies historical rape allegation

 

Earlier this month Attorney General Christian Porter identified himself as the Australian cabinet minister accused of historical rape and has “strenuously denied” all the allegations against him in a Perth press conference.

 

His accuser spoke to detectives at Kings Cross station in February 2020 and was in contact with them at least 5 times thereafter in the following three months. On June 23^rd the woman emailed Police to say she no longer wanted to proceed with reporting the matter. At that point she had not yet made a formal statement. She took her own life the next day.

 

After her death police came into possession of a personal document/statement made by the woman sometime prior detailing the accusations. This document was made available to some media outlets.

 

Katherine Murphy, the Guardian’s political editor summarized the contents of the statement.

 

I have shortened this to the following bullet points.

 

1.     The alleged assault took place on a specific date in January 1988.

2.     The accuser ironed Porters shirt prior to the assault.

3.     Porter made lewd comments about her breasts and said she would make a good housewife.

4.     The accuser agreed to a non-penetrative sex act at Porter’s request after an evening out in Sydney.

5.     Porter then allegedly sexually assaulted (raped) her more than once that same evening.

6.     The accuser states she was drunk and felt dizzy.

7.     The details recounted in the woman’s statement are graphic.

8.     She says the man helped her clean up afterwards, including washing her body and her hair.

9.     she was “deeply shocked and ashamed” in the aftermath, and told nobody about what had happened."

 

 

 

Although we cannot analyse this list of bullet points there a couple of things to note.

 

1.     We have a specific time, date and place named for the assault. This is important in that it gives us the expectation that the accused will give a reliable denial. A reliable denial consists of 3 things. 

 

a.     The pronoun “I”. This places the subject psychologically in his words. It is very powerful and its absence is not to be missed. It can indicate a desire to not be present. A missing pronoun “I” creates distance psychologically between the subject (speaker, writer) and his or her words.  The more serious or heinous the allegation the more likely it is that this powerful psychological presence (The use of “I”) will be used when denying the allegation.  It is instinctive and intuitive.

b.     “did not”, or “didn’t”. Either is fine. The use of “never” elongates time.  This is why it is important to know the context. Is the allegation of a specific time and place? Is it clear what the allegation is? In this case we have established date, time, location and that consensual non-penetrative sex is alleged, as well as rape at least twice thereafter.

c.     The specific allegation stated. In this case both consensual non-penetrative sex and rape.

 

 

 

 

2.     Also, worth noting is the mentioning of washing.  The accuser’s account allegedly includes that Porter helped wash her body after the assault.  Those that commit sexual offences often include in their language the mentioning of washing or water after the assault has taken place.  They have a psychological need to wash themselves clean of the deed they have done. Language and reality sometimes mirror each other in this way.

 

 

 

For the sake of understanding of how instinctive this is, imagine for a moment you are waiting in your car at a traffic light and another car fails to break in time and rams straight up the back of you. When the police arrive the driver of the other car tells the officer, in front of you, that you reversed into him, when he was sitting at the lights.

 

What would be the first thing you would say? Would you say “Naa Never happened”? Would you say, “I can say categorically that nothing of that nature ever happened”?

 

It is very likely that the first word to come out of your mouth would be the personal pronoun “I”, followed by “did not” and then “reverse into him”. You may well say a lot of other things…., but the reliable denial will usually appear early and often. A personal accusation should produce a personal pronoun response.

 

 

The press conference went on for more than forty minutes. In this time Porter denied the allegations repeatedly.  He was reported in the press as “Strenuously denying all allegations against him”. On closer inspection did he deny having consensual non-penetrative sex or raping his accuser?

 

Below are all of Porter’s 20 denials from the press conference. 

 

1.     And I hope that whatever else happens, from this point, that you will understand that in saying today that the things that are being claimed to have happened did not happen, that I do not mean to impose anything more upon your grief.

 

2.     what is being alleged did not happen

 

3.     nothing in the allegations that have been printed ever happened.

 

4.     I can say categorically that what has been put in various forms and allegations simply did not happen.

 

5.     something that simply did not happen,

 

6.     Reporter: Is your defence here that you didn't sleep with the alleged victim or it was consensual?

Mr Porter: I did not sleep with the victim. We didn't have anything of that nature happen between us.

7.     I can say to you all, it didn't happen

 

8.     I can only say to you it didn't happen.

 

9.     all I could say is what I have said to you today, that it just didn't happen.

 

10. Reporter: Were you ever alone, the two of you?

Mr Porter: Look, I just — I don't think so.

11. All I have by way of the allegations is what I have literally read, the same things that you would have read. They just didn't happen.

 

12. something that just didn't happen 33 years ago. So, if that happens, I couldn't succeed to disapprove something that didn't happen

 

13. they just didn't happen.

 

14. Could I have forgotten the things that have been printed? Could I have forgotten or misconstrued the things that I have read, which are said to have occurred? Absolutely not. They just didn't happen

 

15. You allegedly then forced her to perform oral sex on you and that after that you raped her twice. What do you say to that allegation?

Mr Porter: Just it didn't happen, and it's not true.

16. I'm not commentating on survival or politics. I'm simply saying to you all, that I did — it just did not happen.

 

17. Was there a time that you spent alone with this person?

Mr Porter: It's not impossible, but I have never been in the person's room or anything like that.

18. you don't remember having any other kind of relationship with her?

Mr Porter: It's because I didn't.

19. I'm just saying, it didn't happen.

 

20. I will finish by saying the things that I have read did not happen, and to suggest that they could be forgotten is ridiculous. They just never happened.

 

Wow! Twenty denials of a terrible allegation and yet he is unwilling or unable to give a single reliable denial. There are some worthy mentions within these.

Porter demonstrates that the pronoun “I” comes naturally to him as it does with all of us who speak the English language.  He uses it several times to deny the accusations but to what does he connect himself so strongly?

“I can say categorically”, “I can say to you all”, “I can only say to you”, “All I can say”, “I’m simply saying to you all” and “I’m just saying”.

All of the above use the pronoun “I”, places him psychologically there. But where does he go? He uses the personal pronoun to tell us what he can say. That is where the weight of the sentence is. It is not to the denial.

This is similar to a Police officer in a press conference where he is not permitted to make public some of the details of a case. “All I can say is that the suspect was white and about 6 foot tall.” This would likely be an indication that there is more information that the officer has that he is not going to tell the press.

“I did not go to the shop” is reliable. “I can only say that me at the shop never happened”, is not. The weight is what I am able say rather than what I’m saying. This is how deception works. The stress of a true lie will be avoided by the brain 90 percent plus of the time.

 

Denial #6 is also interesting.

Reporter: Is your defence here that you didn't sleep with the alleged victim or it was consensual?

Mr Porter: I did not sleep with the victim. We didn't have anything of that nature happen between us.

At first glance this looks good. Pronoun “I” followed by “did not”. But, then not only is the allegation parroted from the reporter (“sleep with the victim”) but it is not the allegation against him.

We all have a subjective internal dictionary. What is it to “sleep with someone” in the subject’s internal dictionary?  

In most people’s internal dictionary to “sleep with someone” is likely consensual penetrative intercourse with the possible addition of spending the night together. This may of course differ, but it is unlikely that either oral sex or rape would be included under the umbrella of “sleeping together”. The subject needs to be asked “what is sleeping together?”

The language of sex differs greatly for different people.

“Sexual relations” for Bill Clinton meant penetrative sex allowing him to say reliably, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman Miss Lewinsky”. He did not lie. Oral sex was not included in his internal definition of “sexual relations”. Miss Lewinsky’s dictionary definition differed from Clinton’s as did Hilary’s judging by the black eye Clinton sported in the aftermath.  

Lastly in this particular denial is the use of the word “victim”.  It is parroted from the journalist words meaning that it did not come from the subject himself in the free editing process. That it remained in the subject’s reply is still unexpected and concerning. 

Had it not been parroted it would be very concerning.  Some suspects have used similar phrasing and worse describing their accusers as “my victim” thereby taking ownership of the victim. That is not the case here, but its use is still not good.

In denial #16 the subject self-censors. It looks as if he was going to say, “I did not….” but was unable to. It is amazing how the brain won’t allow the true lie. He says, “I did”, and then pauses. In a fraction of a second the brain protects itself from the stress of a true lie as he reverts back to his repeated sentence with psychological distance between himself and the denial.

“I'm not commentating on survival or politics. I'm simply saying to you all, that I did — it just did not happen.”

 

In conclusion within the press conference there were twenty separate occasions where either the subject was put in a position where a reliable denial was expected, or he created an opportunity to give one himself. 

Both the accusation of consensual non-penetrative sex and the allegation of rape are still very much a possibility and moving towards being likely by this many unreliable denials and distancing language. This is not however definitive, and the accuser’s statement would be preferable for a complete conclusion.