On 3 July 2026, after almost a month of evidence and submissions before the Adelaide District Court, a jury unanimously acquitted D.V. (suppressed) of a charge of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship. The verdict was returned On Friday 3 July 2026 at 8:42pm following a trial that ran from 10 June 2026 to 3 July 2026.
The acquittal marked the culmination of an extraordinarily lengthy and complex criminal proceeding that had been the subject of multiple trials and appeals over many years. Prior to the 2026 trial, D.V. had twice been convicted in the District Court of South Australia prior to our engagement. One conviction followed a jury trial and the other followed a judge-alone trial. Both convictions were subsequently overturned by the South Australian Court of Appeal, which ordered retrials on each occasion.
Our firm was engaged only three months before the commencement of the third trial. The engagement followed our successful appearances in R v HTD [2024] QDCPR 30 and R v Featherstone [2025] QDC 147, matters which highlighted our experience in the conduct of serious and complex criminal litigation. Given the history of the proceedings and the significance of the allegations, D.V. specifically sought a fresh defence team for what would become the third trial.
The prosecution case concerned allegations dating back more than two decades and relied heavily upon historical witness accounts, prior recorded evidence, and the complainant’s version of events. The trial involved extensive consideration of evidence spanning many years, including family relationships, community interactions, business dealings, and the circumstances said to be relevant to the alleged offending period.
The defence case challenged the reliability and accuracy of the allegations and focused on the inconsistencies, improbabilities, and evidentiary difficulties inherent in a prosecution based upon events alleged to have occurred many years earlier. Significant legal and forensic issues arose throughout the hearing, requiring careful analysis of previous trial evidence, appellate decisions, and the admissibility of various categories of evidence.
Regan Harms who heads up the Hannay Lawyers Sydney office instructed counsel Lester Fernandez SC and Tomislav Bicanic. Given the volume of material generated across the earlier trials and appeals, the preparation required a comprehensive review of thousands of pages of transcripts, exhibits, witness statements, defence material, and appellate judgments within a compressed timeframe.
After hearing all of the evidence and receiving directions from the trial judge, the jury began deliberations at 4:23pm. At 8:42 pm on Friday, 3 July 2026, the jury returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty.
The acquittal brought to an end one of the most protracted criminal proceedings in recent South Australian history. For D.V., it concluded years of litigation that had included two convictions, two successful appeals, and three separate trials. The unanimous verdict represents the final chapter in a case that tested the criminal justice system over many years and proved again why Hannay Lawyers reputation precedes them.
