Jamie MacArthur, now 58, ended up in headlines across Australia after targeting a young woman who was visiting Melbourne in 2017 for the city\u2019s fashion week. The 22-year-old, whom he had followed on to a tram, had mouthed \u201chelp\u201d to fellow passengers but the plea went unheeded. <\/p>\n
He was initially sentenced in 2018 to seven years and nine months\u2019 imprisonment for what the judge characterised as \u201cbrazen, predatory and unwanted\u201d conduct. During the hearing, the judge took into account the additional anxiety MacArthur might feel knowing he was likely to face deportation at the conclusion of his sentence. <\/p>\n
The case re-emerged in headlines the following year, when prosecutors successfully lobbied the Victoria Court of Appeal for a longer sentence, arguing that the one imposed in 2018 was \u201cmanifestly inadequate\u201d. <\/p>\n
MacArthur was then ordered to serve a sentence of nine years and nine months\u2019 imprisonment, with a minimum term of imprisonment of six years and four months before he could begin applying for parole. <\/p>\n
He arrived back in New Zealand as a 501 deportee in January 2025. <\/p>\n
\u2018Rubbed his nipples\u2019<\/p>\n
MacArthur had only been released from jail hours before the March 2017 rape – having been placed in a holding cell as police waited for him to sober up following a nearly hour-long rampage of nuisance behaviour in Melbourne\u2019s central business district. <\/p>\n
\u201cDuring that time the respondent was observed to be behaving in a threatening and aggressive manner, and assaulting members of the public by pushing, punching and kicking them\u201d, according to a summary of events cited by the Victoria Court of Appeal. <\/p>\n
Inside a shopping complex, he stole a bottle of juice before approaching two women. <\/p>\n
\u201cWhile speaking to one of them, he lifted his shirt and rubbed his nipples, before putting his fingers in his mouth and licking them,\u201d documents state. \u201cHe then touched another female on the arm with his fingers, which he had just removed from his mouth.\u201d<\/p>\n
After returning outside, he approached a woman who \u201ctook fright and ran away\u201d, chasing her to a tram before giving up. <\/p>\n
Bourke St in Melbourne, Australia. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe respondent then approached a woman in Bourke Street, blocked her path, and began to follow her,\u201d court documents state. \u201cHe desisted when another male intervened.\u201d<\/p>\n
He pestered and intimidated two other women before police arrived to arrest him at 5.20pm. <\/p>\n
For those charges, MacArthur pleaded guilty to 13 counts of common assault and one count of theft, with the sentences for those crimes running concurrent with his rape sentences. <\/p>\n
\u2018You\u2019re not going to leave\u2019<\/p>\n
MacArthur was released on bail at 9.37pm. At 4.49 the following morning, he began targeting the woman he would later rape as she waited at a tram station after a night out socialising with friends. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe told her that she looked pretty and he invited her back to his place to drink alcohol,\u201d documents state. \u201cThe victim responded that she had to go home for the night. The respondent then began to pull the victim by the arm, forcing her to come with him.\u201d<\/p>\n
When the woman repeated that she needed to go home, he responded: \u201cYou\u2019re not going to leave me now, are you?\u201d<\/p>\n
He followed her through the city and on to another tram. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe continued to grab at the victim and tried to pull her towards him to kiss her,\u201d court documents state. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe victim was frightened, and she thought that it was better to placate the respondent, so at one point she returned his kiss. She made eye contact with two male passengers and mouthed the word \u2018Help\u2019, but they did not respond.\u201d<\/p>\n
The woman tried to escape when the tram stopped outside Melbourne\u2019s St Vincent\u2019s Hospital, running for the locked hospital entrance. He followed and said he wouldn\u2019t let her go in.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are going to f*** tonight,\u201d he responded angrily when the woman tried to convince him she was there to visit a friend. <\/p>\n
Terror caught on CCTV<\/p>\n
MacArthur was filmed on the hospital\u2019s CCTV as he grabbed the woman and forcibly dragged her away from the doors. The woman ran back to the door after getting thrown to the ground and pushed a bell, hoping in vain to be let inside. MacArthur followed her to the door, began grinding against her, then sexually assaulted her. <\/p>\n
\u201cAt that stage, he had the victim trapped in the corner by the entry doors, and he continued to fondle and kiss her,\u201d the Court of Appeal noted. \u201cHe then put the victim in a headlock and dragged her around by the neck to the opposite side of the alcove.\u201d<\/p>\n
As the two wrestled on a hand railing, he tried twice more to sexually assault her. <\/p>\n
At that point, the respondent again put the victim in a headlock and proceeded to drag her around, attempting to pull her away from the doors (charge 19 \u2014 common assault).<\/p>\n
\u201cAt least a part of that episode was witnessed by two members of hospital security, who, for no apparent reason, did nothing to intervene to assist the victim,\u201d the courts noted. \u201cThe respondent then dragged the victim out of the entrance alcove and on to the street, where she fell to the ground.\u201d <\/p>\n
\u2018Went for it\u2019<\/p>\n
A hospital cleaner walking to work saw MacArthur holding the victim by the hair and kicking her legs. <\/p>\n
The woman was finally able to break away and get inside the hospital. Security tried to speak with her but by that point she was unresponsive and in shock. MacArthur also went inside the hospital, asking her to leave with him. She refused. <\/p>\n
He finally left the hospital after trying to kick a security guard and kicking and punching the glass doors when they wouldn\u2019t open. He was arrested about 12 hours later. Police did not release him the second time. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe said to the police that he knew that he was being overly aggressive, but he believed that he had \u2018scored\u2019 with the victim, so he just \u2018went for it\u2019,\u201d court documents state. <\/p>\n
In evaluating the initial sentence, the Court of Appeal noted that MacArthur had no prior sexual offences on his record and had admitted guilt at a very early stage. Another mitigating factor, it was noted, was his own traumatic childhood that led to an early dependence on alcohol. <\/p>\n
But the justices also noted that the courts had a duty to protect women, and to make it clear that such offending was \u201centirely unacceptable and reprehensible\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt must have been plain to him, or, had he bothered to reflect about it, it would have been, that the ordeal to which he subjected the victim was terrifying and degrading,\u201d they noted in their decision. <\/p>\n
Another young woman targeted<\/p>\n
MacArthur had moved to Australia in his early 20s. He had been unemployed for about 20 years at the time of offending, receiving a benefit.<\/p>\n
Like all 501 deportees, he was subject to a parole-like \u201creturning offenders order\u201d upon his arrival in New Zealand. Among the rules was an abstinence from alcohol.<\/p>\n
But the restrictions didn\u2019t stop him two weeks after his arrival from getting intoxicated on Ponsonby Rd and approaching a young woman. <\/p>\n
\u201cHey young lady, do you wanna f***?\u201d he said before following her and touching her buttocks. <\/p>\n
He continued to make \u201cexplicit statements expressing his sexual intentions\u201d and \u201casserting his entitlement to sexual access with her\u201d until police arrived. <\/p>\n
This time, he was sentenced to four and a half months\u2019 imprisonment. <\/p>\n
In October, MacArthur\u2019s returning offender order – which he had violated several times aside from the Ponsonby incident – was extended until next October. Additional conditions were added, including an electronically monitored curfew from 7pm to 7am. <\/p>\n
Kava danger?<\/p>\n
In the High Court at Auckland last month, Crown prosecutor Brett Tantrum, representing the Department of Corrections, asked Justice Geoffrey Venning to also impose an interim supervision order to run in tandem with the returning offender order. <\/p>\n
Although both orders have similar restrictions, prosecutors suggested an interim supervision order would allow for MacArthur to also undergo intensive monitoring – allowing for 24-hour monitoring – and a restriction on consuming kava. <\/p>\n
Crown prosecutor Brett Tantrum. Photo \/ Michael Craig<\/p>\n
Alcohol, Tantrum noted, has been \u201cthe real challenge\u201d for MacArthur in the past, causing the disinhibition that contributed to his earlier offences. The problem, the judge was told, is that MacArthur appears to have replaced alcohol with kava. <\/p>\n
The drink, traditional in many Pacific cultures, \u201cis often used for sedative, hypnotic and muscle-relaxant effects, in much the same way that alcohol is used\u201d, according to Australia\u2019s Alcohol and Drug Foundation. But it has increased in popularity in Australia over the decades \u201cas a substitute for alcohol, to reduce alcohol-related harms in the community\u201d, the organisation states. <\/p>\n
MacArthur did not drink kava for cultural purposes, the court was told. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe initially described its effect as \u2018numbing\u2019 to his probation officer and told her that it calmed him down,\u201d Justice Venning noted. \u201cHowever, his probation officer is concerned that he also described it as having the effect of \u2018being drunk and hungover at the same time\u2019. <\/p>\n
\u201cShe was also concerned that as Mr MacArthur\u2019s research disclosed that kava use would not show on an alcohol and drug test, he considered he could continue to use it as he was not in breach of his ROO [returning offender order] in doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n
But defence lawyer Jane-Frances O\u2019Halloran argued that an additional set of restrictions was not warranted when MacArthur has had no issues since the last set of restrictions were added in October. More conditions, she said, would be unnecessary, overreaching and inconsistent with his rights.<\/p>\n
She acknowledged that alcohol has been a trigger for her client, but she also noted that he had not engaged in any serious sexual offending since his release from jail in mid-2025. <\/p>\n
\u201cI note, however, he has been subject to the ROO conditions since then, which may well explain why he has not re-offended,\u201d Justice Venning said. <\/p>\n
Justice Geoffrey Venning. Photo \/ Jason Oxenham<\/p>\n
The judge agreed with prosecutors that MacArthur has \u201ca pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending\u201d and remains a high risk of future offending. But that risk has already been tempered by the current restrictions, he said. <\/p>\n
The judge added that \u201cthere is no cogent evidence before the court\u201d to suggest kava use has \u201cthe same disinhibiting factors that alcohol has on Mr MacArthur\u2019s behaviour\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere may be a degree of self-harm in terms of Mr MacArthur\u2019s use of it in conjunction with other medication but that is not a matter which the court needs to engage with, and it does not justify the imposition of IM to police such a condition,\u201d the judge added. <\/p>\n
The judge noted that an interim supervision would be a temporary solution anyway. Authorities are also awaiting a hearing to seek an extended supervision order, which could add restrictions for a further 10 years. <\/p>\n
That hearing, the judge suggested, would optimally be held before the expiration in October of MacArthur\u2019s current conditions. <\/p>\n