17-y-o girl broken after accused rapist freed

The unanimous not guilty verdict in a case in which a 17-year-old schoolgirl testified that she was raped three times in one night and her head dunked in a bucket of water in an attempt to drown her has left her asking, “Where is the system of justice?”

Relatives and friends of the girl say they are shocked by the verdict that was handed down earlier this month by a seven-member jury comprising six men and one woman.

The 43-year-old taxi driver who was accused of committing the offences in March 2020 was freed of the rape, attempted murder and assault charges.

“The girl is really broken and disappointed by both the ordeal and outcome of the case and this can affect her life and her studies,” an elderly relative said.

“She was an emotional wreck giving evidence and there were times she had to come out of the courtroom to get a break to compose herself to continue her evidence. Now, she is asking where is the justice after they let him go?”

Attorney-at-law Hensley Williams, who represented the taxi driver, explained last week that his client’s defence was that the complainant and an older relative, who was his ex-lover, lied and fabricated the evidence to rid him from the community.

Williams said the alleged crime scene was not protected and the forensic evidence was not sufficient to prove the charges against his client because the DNA found on exhibits was not exclusive to his client.

“The accused was denied bail and spent almost two years and nine months in custody before trial,” the attorney told The Sunday Gleaner.

“This case shows how important scientific evidence can be in cases of this nature.”

The prosecution presented that the complainant knew the accused before because some time ago, he was involved in an intimate relationship with her relative.

According to the case presented, at midnight on the day in question in March 2020, the complainant was at home sleeping when she felt a pillow over her face, stifling her. She began to struggle and fight until she managed to remove the pillow and then discovered that it was the accused who was attacking her.

The teen described how the accused used pillowcases to stuff her mouth and tie her hands behind her. The accused then tied her feet with a belt and then fastened it to the bed head, she said.

She then related how the accused raped her three times for about five minutes each time throughout the night. She said before the accused began his sexual attack on her, he said it was her older relative’s fault that he was going to rape her. He said also that he did not want to commit the act, but he had just gone to a yard and saw his ex-lover having sexual intercourse with her new boyfriend.

The 17-year-old said she was released after 8 a.m. the next day when her relative came home and knocked on the door. When she came into the room, she saw the complainant tied up and thought she was dead.

TESTIMONY

The relative testified that she glanced to the left of the room and saw the accused standing in a closet. Armed with a hammer, he chased his ex-lover, but she managed to escape.

On his return to the room, the accused took the complainant to the bathroom and pushed her head in a bucket of water, trying to drown her. The schoolgirl testified that during the ordeal, the man kept saying he had to kill her because if he let her go, she was going to talk and he would go to jail.

A report was made to the police and the taxi driver was arrested and charged with rape and attempted murder of the teen.

The assault charge was in relation to his ex-lover, who he was accused of chasing with the hammer.

The prosecution tendered into evidence pillowcases; a red belt; a ginger beer bottle, which had been found in the room; and a hammer. Vaginal swabs were taken from the complainant as well as buccal swabs from the accused.

The forensic analyst said based on test results, the accused could not be excluded from the DNA found on the belt, bottle and hammer.

The analyst noted that Y-STR testing was done on the vaginal swabs and there was a mixture of at least two male DNA contributors, and the accused could not be excluded as a minor contributor.

The forensic analyst explained that based on that testing, it would mean that male relatives of the accused would have the same DNA because the chromosome in the DNA would be shared by the accused and all male relatives along the patrilineal line.

A medical report was tendered which stated that the complainant had pains to her shoulders and superficial bruises to her arms, nose, left knee and thigh. The vaginal walls were in good tone, the report stated.

In his address to the jury, Williams emphasised that the accused man used to live in that very house with the complainant’s relative and DNA could have been deposited during his time there. He reminded the jurors that the analyst agreed during cross-examination that the DNA deposit is likely to remain on objects up to five years.

DNA NOT EXCLUSIVE

Williams told the jury that the analyst said under cross-examination that the male DNA profile found on the vaginal swab taken from the complainant was not exclusive to the accused and all male relatives of the accused had the same DNA profile as the accused.

Williams asked the jury to bear in mind the medical certificate tendered which showed that the complainant’s vaginal walls were in good tone and no cuts, lacerations or bruises were seen. He invited the jury to say that no sexual intercourse took place. He also reminded the jury that under cross-examination, the scene of crime officer admitted that the crime scene was left unprotected and unsecured for more than 10 hours, which could lead to contamination and opportunity for the scene to be staged.

“Under cross-examination, the analyst agreed with me that DNA science is not static; it is dynamic and evolving. I formed the view that it is not conclusive and pointed that out to the jurors in my address,” Williams told The Sunday Gleaner last week.

The prosecution had asked the jury to find that the absence of laceration to the vagina did not mean she was not raped.

Relatives of the complainant, who are stunned by the not-guilty verdict, say they will have to seek further intervention to help the traumatised teen.

editorial@gleanerjm.com