The Dubai Criminal Court acquitted an African of the charge of raping a woman of his nationality, due to her lack of confidence in the charges against him, and her lack of conviction of the veracity of the victim’s story, as she had known the accused a year before the incident, in addition to that she was with him the night of the incident for dinner, Then they spent time inside his car in a bright area teeming with pedestrians, without trying to call for help or getting out of the car, which casts doubt on her later claim that he had assaulted her under duress.
In detail, the Public Prosecution referred the accused to the Criminal Court, on charges of committing the felony of having sexual intercourse with a female under duress, by using him alone in his vehicle to carry out his crime, relying on his physical strength.
The victim stated in the investigations that she knew him through her friends in the residence a year before the incident, as he was driving them with his own car, and she went out with him on the night of the incident to dine at a nearby restaurant, and after they finished he parked the car in a parking lot behind the building, then sat in the back seat, and asked Including moving to sit next to him, and then committed his crime.
She added that she went to the residence after that, and waited for her friends to arrive, and then told them what happened, so they asked her to inform the police, noting that she was watching passersby from the window of the car, and there was lighting in the place, but no one noticed them, and she did not appeal to her fear of the accused.
For his part, the defense attorney for the accused, lawyer Muhammad Al-Ridha, argued that the statements attributed to his client were invalid in the evidence report, due to the fact that the policeman who wrote them did not use an interpreter, pointing out that the accused did not understand the policeman, and he thought that he was asking him if they had sex together, so he admitted that he did That, but with the victim’s consent. He also argued that the crime of rape was not present in the incident, due to the absence of the element of coercion, contrary to the claim of the victim, as he did not use any means to coerce her, and her statements contradicted in the police report and the Public Prosecution investigations.
The forensic report confirmed that there were no visible injuries on the victim’s body indicating her resistance or exposure to violence, in addition to the fact that she remained with him for about 45 minutes, which indicates the implausibility of her story, especially since the doors were open, and the lighting was available in the place.
For its part, the court confirmed in its ruling the invalidity of the defendant’s confession, as well as the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, noting that it was not satisfied with the circumstances and circumstances of the case, and ruled his innocence.
• The victim saw passers-by from the car window during the incident, but she did not cry out “for fear of the accused.”
• The victim was with the accused on the night of the incident for dinner… and she knew him a year before the incident.