The prosecution’s case is that on or about the 2nd day of November 2011,
one Dusu Nyang (PW1) noticed the prosecutrix moving on the nearby
street with her inner pants in hand, bleeding with blood stains all over her
body. PW1 called the attention of her neighbor Juliet (PW3) who identified
prosecutrix as a neighbor living behind her house. The prosecutrix was
taken to her mother and thereafter they traced the drops of blood up to the
door of a room said to be occupied by the accused. The accused was
arrested and matter reported to the police. The prosecutrix identified the
accused to them as the person who ravished her. During the investigations,
the prosecutrix was made to see a Doctor who examined her and issued a
medical report exhibit “B”.
The accused denied the charge both in his recorded statements to the police
and in his testimony before this Court. He maintained that he has been
framed up by PW4 as a result of a dispute arising from his refusal to allow
PW4 establish an amorous relationship with one Fatou a married lady
living in the same compound with the accused. He thus denied the charge
thereby putting in issue all the essential ingredients of the offence of rape.
At the end of the trial, both sides waived their rights to address me.
Under section 121 of the Criminal Code, the essential elements of rape
which have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt are:
(a)
that there was unlawful sexual intercourse involving the
prosecutrix;
(b)
2
that the prosecutrix could not or did not consent; and