A lot of doubt surrounds the results obtained from the Forensic medicine, as the incident took place on
5/3/2016. Besides, the victim’s conduct had not been investigated.
The doctor in charge did not state his rank
The lack of credibility on the side of the prosecution’s witness, who had had personal interest, and did not
reside in the house in question, as he stated that he had not seen the accused on the night of the incident at
home.
The accused’s presence in the house was not a solid evidence that he had committed the crime. He was
there visiting his family and he did not meet the victim.
The investigation was inadequate as the crime scene was not inspected after the detective’s visit to check
the presence of material evidence.
The appellant requested the annulment of both rulings by the court of first instance and that of the court
of appeal, and that they were to be substituted by a court order that cancelled the case and released the
accused.
Facts
The facts are summed up in that the victim (Rwaa) had been at home alone - or in the company of her
younger siblings. Her mother had been out to a funeral house near the family’s home.
The accused, who was Rwaa’s uncle, her father’s brother, came in. Rwaa’s little brother had thrown her
sandals into a deserted room, so she went in to fetch it. Seeing her, the accused followed her into the
room. He pinned her to a wall and put his hand on her mouth threatening her. He then took off her
underwear and inserted his penis inside her vagina. Suddenly he heard her father’s voice who had just
arrived home, talking on the phone. The accused threw her clothes and dictated to her to tell her father if asked about being in that room - that she had been bitten by an ant and that she had gone into that room to
take off her clothes to get rid of the ant. The accused then left passing by his brother, the victim’s father.
The father then found his daughter in the deserted room, hurriedly trying to put on her underwear looking
frightened and discomposed. When her father asked her, she began to stutter. His voice went louder as he
called out for his other brother, Hanafi, who had been watching TV in his room. So, when her uncle asked
her, she told him that her uncle had had sex with her. The father and the uncle noticed some wet stuff on
the victim’s clothes, so he called the accused, but the latter’s phone was turned off. Then the plaintiff took
his child to the Family and Juvenile Affairs dept. at the police station. A suit was filed, and the victim was
taken to hospital where it was proven that she had been sexually abused.
A sample was taken from her clothes and her vagina and was sent to the Forensic Medicine lab which
affirmed the presence of semen in her clothes. Two days later the accused was arrested, and due
procedures were taken against him. Then, he was tried and was convicted by the Court of First Instance,
and the ruling was upheld by the court of appeal.
Having gone through the records of the trial and all the evidences and detective’s journal, and the rulings
of the lower courts and their reasons, and the appellant’s request and his reasons, I approve of the rulings
by the lower courts.
2