Cricket fan is kicked out of a match for bringing in a ‘No Means No’ sign targeting a player who was found not guilty of raping a woman
- Cricket fan escorted from Twenty20 International for unfurling banner at match
- The woman raised a banner that read, 'No means no' directed at Scott Kuggeleijn
- New Zealand Cricket and Westpac Stadium said it was wrong to remove banner
- Kuggeleijn was found not guilty of rape in a 2017 jury trial over a 2015 incident
A cricket fan was escorted out of a Twenty20 match after she unfurled a banner promoting sexual consent.
The woman was watching the double header between the New Zealand men's and women's teams and India at Wellington on Wednesday night, Stuff reported.
She then unfurled the sign that read 'no means no' before she was escorted from the grounds.
New Zealand Cricket and Westpac Stadium admitted they were in the wrong for removing the banner.
The woman was watching the double header between the New Zealand men's and women's teams and India at Wellington on Wednesday night when she unfurled the sign (pictured)
The message is believed to have been directed at Black Cap Scott Kuggeleijn (pictured) who was found not guilty of rape following a 2017 jury trial
During the trial the Scott Kuggeleijn (pictured) faced a single charge of raping a woman at a Hamilton East flat following a night out on May 2015
The message is believed to have been directed at Black Cap Scott Kuggeleijn who was found not guilty of rape following a 2017 jury trial, NZ Herald reported.
During the trial the cricket player faced a single charge of raping a woman at a Hamilton East flat following a night out on May 2015.
Kuggeleijn denied the accusation at the time and testified he 'thought [the complainant] was enjoying it because she was breathing heavily and just acting the same as I was when I was touching her'.
He denied the woman's testimony that he had pinned her arms down and that she made numerous attempts to wriggle free.
The pair had met at a house party but later went to Keystone Bar.
Only after spending a short time at the venue, the pair went back to the complainant's flat.
Share this article
Kuggeleijn explained the pair were 'clearly getting on with each other and I just wanted to see where things would go'.
The complainant said in court the pair began fondling when Kuggeleijn tried to pull off her underwear on many occasions.
'Initially I was okay with it and then I started to say 'no' in a light-hearted way because I didn't feel I needed to be aggressive about it, thinking he would stop ...then at one point he said 'let me, just let me' and I would say, 'no, no, stop'.
The complainant said she had intended to stop him as she felt it was 'weird' becuase she knew the man's brother.
When the pair awoke the next morning, Kuggeleijn began to kiss the woman.
The complainant claimed she had to repeatedly try to hold up her underwear as Kuggeleijn pressured her for sex.
Scott Kuggeleijn (pictured) also denied that he pinned the woman and held her down even though she tried to wriggle free
'He'd ignored me saying no, so I just looked up at the ceiling and, at this point, I started having tears coming down my face.'
Kuggeleijn denied the claims from the woman that she said no 'dozens of times'.
'I tried [having sex] twice, like she might have said 'no, no' a few times but it wasn't dozens of times.'
He also denied that he pinned the woman and held her down even though she tried to wriggle free.
The defence counsel Phillip Morgan QC argued the sex was consensual.
'The defence case is that the complainant did consent to the act of intercourse that took place. Regretted later, no doubt.
'He believed that he was having intercourse with a consenting partner and he had reasonable grounds for thinking that.'
The jury took less than one hour to hand down a not guilty verdict.
Kuggeleijn denied the claims from the woman that she said no 'dozens of times' (pictured, cricket grounds)
Comments 0
Share what you think
No comments have so far been submitted. Why not be the first to send us your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.
