She added that on 28 January, 2008, with the assistance of persons of goodwill, she
managed to escape through the window;
When questioned, M.T. confirmed that he had indeed kept K.R. at his home and abused
her;
Before the Abidjan Criminal Court, following the flagrante delicto procedure, M.T. did
not recognize the facts levied against him:
He stated that the victim had agreed to stay with him;
Following judgment N° 362/08 of 25 January, 2008, the Abidjan Trial Court rendered the
following decision in the case:
Declares the accused M.T. guilty of the accusations brought against him – kidnapping of
a minor, forcible confinement and sexual indecency committed with violence on a 15year-old minor:
As sanction, sentences him to 05 years of imprisonment with a fine of 50,000 francs;
Pronounces against him, the deprivation of the rights provided for in article 66 of the
penal code for 10 years;
Bars him from the entire territory of the Republic of Cote d’Ivoire for 05 years;
Orders him further to pay the costs;
By letter dated 29 January, 2008, registered on 29 January, 2008, the defendant M.T.
appealed against the aforementioned judgment.
He however failed to show up during the appeal hearing to present his arguments;
The Prosecutor requested confirmation of the contested judgment.
MOTIVES
ON THE FORM
On the nature of the decision
The defendant M.T, who escaped from prison as attested by the letter dated 21
December, 2011 from the registrar, was not aware of the present proceedings;
The civil party also did not appear in in the appeal hearing;
It is appropriate to pass a default ruling with regard to all the parties
On the admissibility of the appeal
M.T's appeal, made in the form and within timeframe prescribed by the law, is
admissible.
ON THE MERIT
Concerning the accusation on abduction of a minor
The accused M.T. does not dispute that the minor K.R., still under the authority of her
parents, stayed with him for a week without their authorization;
That he was thus guilty of the accusation of kidnapping of a minor levied against him;
lt is therefore logical to confirm the contested judgment on this point;
2