A Sydney man has been found not guilty of rape after claiming he was experiencing sexsomnia, a rare sleep disorder, during the incident. Timothy Malcolm Rowland, 40, was accused of non-consensual sex with a woman at his apartment on August 26, 2022, following what appeared to be a consensual night out together.
After spending the evening at the bar and enjoying some drinks, the pair returned to Rowland's Darlinghurst apartment, where they took a bath together. According to the woman, who cannot be identified, she fell asleep, only to awaken to Rowland engaging in sexual activity with her. Shockingly, Rowland argued he was asleep at the time. Yes, you read it correctly. This rather unusual defense had everyone asking questions.
Sexsomnia, often referred to as sleep sex, is recognized as part of parasomnia, wherein individuals perform behaviors—sexual or otherwise—while asleep without any recollection once they awaken, according to the Sleep Foundation. This condition raises complex questions, particularly concerning consent.
Within seconds of discovering Rowland with her, the complainant recorded him on her phone, asking if what he was doing was consensual. “Was it consensual? Was it OK?” Rowland questioned, adding confusion to the situation as the woman frantically expressed her discomfort.
The trial, which took place at the Downing Centre District Court, heard varied testimonies. While it was not disputed whether the sexual act took place, the jury needed to determine whether Rowland was conscious and aware of his actions. After deliberations on January 30, 2025, the jury acquitted Rowland, leaving both the complainant and the court considering the broader ramifications.
Rowland, breathing heavily and visibly relieved as the verdict was read, was embraced by family members, but the emotional toll on the woman involved was significant. “I was freaking out,” she recalled, dramatically recounting her feelings of confusion and distress. “I felt completely confused, disgusted, and anxious,” she added, describing how she felt after the incident.
Judge John Pickering, who presided over the trial, expressed disbelief about the current legal ramifications of sexsomnia. He stated, “What happened to the complainant was awful... It doesn’t mean it was a criminal offense.” He highlighted the lack of existing laws governing sleep disorders like sexsomnia, warning jurors against creating legal standards based on emotional responses rather than the laws at play.
During the proceedings, Crown prosecutor Geoff Harrison argued the woman’s account was credible, remarking, “You’ve seen her response; she’s out of there. He’s crossed the line.” Yet, Rowland's defense team pointed out significant factors such as the incident occurring during untreated sleep apnea and alcohol consumption, asserting it created the ideal circumstances for Rowland's sexsomnia episode.
At the heart of the trial lay the difficult balance between consent and the ramifications of medical conditions. Rowland alleged he had warned the woman about his sleep issues previously, but she had doubts. “I wanted proof,” the complainant stated, underscoring the impact of being thrust unexpectedly and terrifyingly from sleep to the shocking realization of being assaulted.
This specific incident raises broader societal concerns about how the law interacts with atypical medical conditions. Judge Pickering suggested it was time for lawmakers to reevaluate legal frameworks surrounding consent and sleep disorders. “It may be time for government officials to look at obligations for individuals diagnosed with conditions,” he said, acknowledging the legal gray areas involved.
Rowland is part-owner of The Bamboozle Room, noted for its vibrant burlesque and cabaret scenes, which complicates public perception and scrutiny surrounding the case. The courtroom proceedings have inevitably sparked discussions about how society handles cases where individuals claim they are not entirely conscious at the time of alleged sexual offenses.
The verdict delivered echoes larger issues of accountability intertwining with medical anomalies. It compels both the public and legal experts to reconsider how such situations are handled, as well as the responsibilities of individuals who may be unaware of their actions due to conditions like sexsomnia.
Due to the uniqueness of this case, community conversations will likely persist on how courts should handle similar defense strategies moving forward, especially as more people become aware of disorders such as sexsomnia. The complexity of human behavior during sleep remains largely unexplored—leaving many perplexed about the collisions between legality and biology.