She described how the relationship had been rocky from the start but had descended into violence, threats to kill, and rape.
He told the court it was a loving, mutual marriage, where they supported each other’s endeavours, until the last few years when her mental health deteriorated.
Releasing the reasons for his verdict, Judge Sainsbury said the case turned on his assessment of the credibility and reliability of each.
Judge Sainsbury said that while he heard evidence during the trial of the wife’s PTSD, this didn’t make her evidence any less credible.
There was no evidence that mental illness caused hallucinations or, in itself, created false memories or delusions, he said.
The judge found she was an honest and reliable witness, and her account was plausible.
He also found that other witnesses gave evidence which supported the wife’s account, and her diagnosis of PTSD was consistent with her having suffered the type of trauma associated with the allegations.
“The possibility that this was an abusive, controlling relationship, in which the defendant offended against the complainant in the manner alleged, is an available conclusion on the evidence. But it is not the only available conclusion.”
The judge said the defendant’s evidence was also credible, and he couldn’t discount that it wasn’t true.
During the hearing, the defence provided hundreds of messages that the pair exchanged on various forums, including Facebook, WhatsApp, and email.
Judge Sainsbury said that while he accepted the Crown’s proposition that the text messages didn’t necessarily reflect the true nature of the relationship, that wasn’t the general tenor of the texts.
“While mental illness does not make the complainant’s account less credible, there is weight in the defence position that the complainant viewed the actions of the defendant in a negative light that impacted her ability to be objective and impartial.
‘That is also illustrated in her understanding and interpretation of the text messages. The complainant’s reading of the text messages did not fit with what they plainly said”.
Accordingly, the judge said he couldn’t exclude the reasonable possibility that the husband’s evidence was true, and he found the husband not guilty of all charges.
Catherine Hutton is an Open Justice reporter, based in Wellington. She has worked as a journalist at the Waikato Times and RNZ. Most recently she was working as a media adviser at the Ministry of Justice.