He’s now a convicted rapist, but a “well-connected” Melbourne businessman still can’t be named due to concerns about his mental health, his business, and the knock-on effects for his “high profile” clients.
Even after his first night in jail, and following a unanimous jury finding him guilty of two charges of rape and one charge of sexual assault on Monday, his name still can’t be published.
That’s thanks to a suppression order that will remain in place until at least Monday, after the man won a temporary bid for a suppression order that further prevents the publication of his name. While it was set to expire when the jury returned their guilty verdict, the man’s barrister applied for a further interim order, saying it was necessary to protect his client from the risk of self-harm and suicide.
To be clear, this order had been in place to protect the defendant and not the alleged victim. Now a convicted rapist, the suppression order remains in place, again for his protection.
The order was initially granted in 2023 and includes a ban on reporting his industry connections, after a psychiatrist said that if he was identified in media reports, his mental health and safety would be jeopardised. That psychiatrist is set to give further evidence this week, with lawyers for the man trying to fight to further extend the order next Monday in the County Court.
The rape and assault occurred at the man’s house on March 23, 2023, and involved a victim who is several decades younger than the businessman, according to details from the trial. She spent days in the witness box giving evidence during the three-week trial, detailing the events that occurred after her former boss texted her asking, “you free this arvo for a meeting”.
Prosecutors had alleged that the woman was assaulted in the man’s bedroom, and the attack ended when she punched him in the face.
Prior to delivering their verdict, the jury had been told by Judge Frank Gucciardo that it must not be prejudiced against the man due to the type of work he did, nor should they be prejudiced against the woman due to how she presented her evidence and her admission of cocaine use.
Following the jury verdict, it emerged the judge had ordered some evidence gathered by police during the investigation as inadmissible for reasons that have not been provided, according to reporting in The Guardian. This evidence included an early evidence kit the woman he was found guilty of raping had used following instructions by police on how to collect samples.
The man will be appealing the verdict, according to his lawyers, while lawyers for the ABC and other media have been fighting against the suppression order, claiming it’s in the public interest for the man to be identified.
When concerns about the extent of suppression orders being used to protect the identity of Tom Silvagni were raised, state opposition leader Jess Wilson said the Liberals would review whether such laws were working as intended. “Suppression orders should not be used as a mechanism for offenders to hide from victims, the community or take responsibility for their actions,” she said.
Ultimately, only those who can afford to fight for a suppression order will be able to fight for them and win them, given they require expert evidence, including psychiatric reports, on top of legal representation.
In the case of this “high profile” and “well connected” man, the costly fight continues, even after the conviction.
So for the next few days at least, no “high profile clients” need to worry about who they’re connected to.