Disgraced ex-Queensland Police officer Ross Kouimanis fails to overturn conviction for vile abuse of young boy

A predator cop serving an eight-year sentence for the heinous abuse of a young child more than two decades ago has failed to convince a court to overturn his convictions. Former Queensland Police officer Ross Kouimanis was found guilty of a raft of child abuse-related offences – including repeated sexual conduct 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 officer attached to the Gold Coast traffic beat, retiring as a senior constable in 2009. He was jailed for eight years in May. But the disgraced policeman attempted to overturn his court convictions, arguing the trial judge erred in her directions to the jury. He relied on a particular section of the Evidence Act (Qld) concerning the delay in the making of a sexual offence complaint – specifically regarding how a judge must not direct a jury that the absence of a complaint or a delay was relevant to a complainant’s credibility “unless there is sufficient evidence to justify a direction that delay”. Kouimanis submitted that a miscarriage of justice occurred because the trial judge – District Court Judge Dzenita Balić – “did not direct the jury that delay was relevant to the complainant’s credibility”. During the trial, the court was told Koumanis abused the child across 2½ years in the mid-to-late 1990s. “The complainant alleged a variety of sexual acts were engaged in during this period,” a Court of Appeal judgment states. “They included allegations of mutual touching, oral and anal penetration, as well as exposing the complainant to pornography.” The child gave evidence Koumanis physically assaulted him, orally raped and indecently dealt with him in the early 2000s. He did not complain to police until 2023. Koumanis’ legal team argued at trial the child had lied about the offending, citing a possible motive being “revenge”. The issue on the appeal concerned whether there was “sufficient evidence to justify” the relevant direction In rejecting Koumanis’ appeal, Queensland’s Court of Appeal said the complaint being made about 20 years after the events was “self-evident” to the jury. “Rather than focus on the delay of complaint to police, counsel for (Koumanis) focused on a variety of contentions which sought to attack the reliability and credibility of the complainant,” the appeal decision states. The court found the raising of the child’s alleged motive “does not provide a logical basis” to justify the court making a direction that the 20-year delay was relevant to the child’s credibility. “An explanation was given that the complainant had tried to suppress the events of the abuse,” the decision continues. “If accepted by the jury, this would have given an explanation for the delay in making the complaint to the police.” Koumanis’ team had submitted a central part of their case was not that the delay was inconsistent with the child’s accounts, but the “motive to lie and his concealment of it” undermined his credibility. Part of the address to the jury concerned the first of the child’s preliminary complaints. “It was in this way that it was said that there was insufficient evidence in the case to warrant an adverse direction due to delay,” the appeal justices said in their judgment. “It was submitted that the potential motive to lie constituted a response to the potential good reason which had been given to the jury as an example for the delay.” But the court said the evidence in support of the alleged lie “fell short” of evidence about the complainant making “inconsistent statements” to peers. The Court of Appeal justices said the motive to lie contention did not provide “some type of special answer” to the child’s evidence about him trying to “suppress” the abuse. Koumanis’ appeal against his conviction was dismissed.