CASE RPA 0591/15 / HC / KIG Page |3 10. The Court notes that BAPFAKURERA Samuel's statement is corroborated by that of BAZI Julienne who explained that on 22/3/2015, at 2:00 pm, she saw TUYISENGE on the bridge near the sugarcane field, and when she asked her what she was doing she told her that she fled her parents who wanted to beat her because they saw her with a phone. This statement coincides with that of NSABIMANA Theoneste who said that his phone was with TUYISENGE that night, which shows that, indeed, TUYISENGE spent a night with a phone whose origin was unknown to her parents, which made them angry to the point of planning to punish her and she escaped and went to hide in a bridge near the sugarcane field, where BAZI Julienne saw her, after which she decided to seek accommodation where BAPFAKURERA Samuel slept in the house where the sorghum was stored. The sorghum store house belonged to TUYISENGE's father named TWAGIRIMANA, and according to HABYARIMANA Eugene in his statement appearing on Annex 20, BAPFAKURERA Samuel ordinarily slept in the store house as a watchman over the sorghum, which also shows that TUYISENGE's statement confirms that she arrived at the house brought by those who wanted to rape her and seduced her with a controversial telephone; 11. The Court also finds that although TWAGIRIMANA testified that there was a semen near the place where BAPFAKURERA Samuel and TUYISENGE had been sleeping, none of the witnesses who found BAPFAKURERA Samuel and TUYISENGE in the house indicated that he had ever seen semen in the house, and the medical report, apart from saying that there was a red spot on TUYISENGE's vagina, did not show that semen was found on TUYISENGE at the time of the examination, so it is questionable whether the semen was actually there, and what is the evidence to that, because TUYISENGE was immediately taken to the clinic so that it be possible to gather evidence of rape including semen, because BAPFAKURERA Samuel was asked why semen was found where they were lying , and he replied that he had ejaculated in a dream; 12. The Court finds that the foregoing evidence do not prove irrefutably that BAPFAKURERA Samuel committed the offense but casts doubt, for the following reasons:  TUYISENGE description on how she arrived at the sorghum store where she was found with BAPFAKURERA Samuel, and how she was raped is questionable because there is no evidence that she was truthful as described above;  There is no evidence as to the cause of the redness of the posterior sin of hymen of TUYISENGE, nor as to when the problem started, especially since in Annex 20, HABYARIMANA Eugene describes how TUYISENGE was afraid to return home because she was late because she was hanging out with a boy named GASANA; 3|Page