The High Court in Suva recently acquitted an electrician accused of raping his partner during her recovery from childbirth injuries. The court’s decision was based on the prosecution’s inability to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The alleged incident involved a 35-year-old victim and a 26-year-old man in a live-in relationship with a child together.
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred after a heated argument regarding the man’s late arrival home, which led to a physical altercation requiring intervention. After the altercation, the woman, exhausted and unwell, was said to have gone to sleep. It was alleged that the man later returned and had sexual intercourse with her. However, upon reviewing the evidence, Justice Daniel Goundar found the man’s testimony consistent and convincing, corroborated by relatives’ accounts, suggesting the victim’s behavior was manipulative.
The judge concluded that the evidence presented by the victim was less compelling and accepted the man’s version that their encounter was consensual, akin to previous consensual interactions in their relationship.
Acquittals like these are part of a broader judicial pattern emphasizing the need for concrete evidence in cases involving sexual offences. A similar decision in Lautoka, where the court found insufficient evidence regarding consent, also highlighted these requirements. These cases underscore the fundamental legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty,” serving as reminders for thoroughness in judicial proceedings. Despite the difficulties these cases present, the court’s focus remains on safeguarding the rights of the accused while maintaining a vigilant approach to supporting and believing survivors.
Leave a comment