Vanessa Scammell

He was found to be innocent...

But instead of these headlines reigning supreme, it was the magistrate's comments about these new laws that became one of the most widely publicised aspects of Craig's not guilty verdict.

The ABC, who Craig had sued for defamation...

ran articles about new versus old laws, making sure that the commentary of if the laws were different, it would be possible the result may be different, a featured part of their story.

The Guardian also wrote a feature about these new laws, condemning the fact that Craig was tried under old laws.

Not only that, the women involved in the case, who are protected by the courts and whom remain anonymous to this day, actually published these comments and rulings on their social media accounts, prompting cries of outrage from their peers, friends and the industry.

that Craig McLachlan was only found not guilty because of a technicality.

To remind you of the charges Craig was fighting, seven were for indecent assault, six common assault, and one for attempted indecent assault.

As mentioned in other episodes, the common assault charges were added by the DPP six months after initial charges were laid.

So what differences did the new laws offer up?

So what does this actually mean?

Well, it means that one element of what used to be known as indecent assault, the old law, has changed.

that post-2014, charges of indecent assault are now called sexual assault, and within the new laws, the fault element has changed.

When people hear about a criminal charge involving consent, they often think the court is only asking one question.

What happened?

But in law, there's another equally important question.

What did the accused person believe at the time?

That question is what lawyers call the fault element.

The fault element is about the state of mind of a person.

Did the accused person know the other person was not consenting?