Court to rule next Tuesday on no case to answer application by lawyer of the former senior executive

Chief Magistrate Usaia Ratuvili will deliver his ruling next Tuesday on the no case to answer application made by the lawyer of the former senior executive of a publicly listed company charged with one count of indecent assault.

The alleged incident took place in May 2019.

The defence lawyer said that the alleged victim was evasive and untruthful with no credibility whatsoever.

He said that at first she had said that there were no hugs given by the accused or the Brazilian Ambassador to her during the Ambassador’s visit.

The lawyer said that when pushed in cross examination that the Ambassador and the accused gave her hugs on the 26th, 27th and the 28th of March 2019, she had said she could not recall it.

He said that when she was shown her statement given to police on 9th December 2019, the woman had admitted that the accused had given her a hug on the 28th of March 2019.

The lawyer said the alleged victim was not true as she, on the same day had emailed the accused her job application and in that email it is clear that she is full of praise for the accused and there was no complaint whatsoever.

The defence lawyer also said that the alleged victim’s dishonesty is very clear when one looks at her going to work on 23rd April, 2019 at the publicly listed company without resigning from her job at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and when she saw the contract in the evening and the pay was $13,000 a year, she decided not to go to work for the company the next day.

The lawyer also said that the alleged victim continued to work for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for 7 months and she had the government on her side but she still did not file a complaint.

He said if the woman had lost her mental capacity, he would have accepted this as a reason for not reporting.

He said that it is alleged that on 15th May 2019, the woman was with the senior executive for 3 to 5 minutes and the lawyer said that it unbelievable she was hugged for 1 minute.

The defence lawyer also stated that the alleged victim is a big girl and she could have pushed the accused away or yelled for her partner.

The lawyer said that her story is also not true as the accused person has integrity and would not do such a thing especially when her boyfriend was outside and it appears that she was upset with the accused for not offering to increase her salary.

He said that the alleged victim did not complain to the police until 7 months later and has not given a reasonable explanation.

The lawyer said that when the woman complained on the 9th of December after reading a post of Facebook where another woman had said that the accused would hug her tightly, ask for a kiss, sniffs her hair, kisses her forehead, plays with her eyes and runs his hand across her chest and adds that after every meeting, he would rub his nose and lips against the woman’s neck and hugs her tightly, before she would leave.

He said that the alleged victim in this case said almost the exact same thing was done to her and when asked, she said she read it and lodged a complaint after she felt empowered by it.

He also adds that the accused met with her former partner after her cross examination yesterday at lunch time and it is obvious that she caught up with him to brief him.

The lawyer also told the court that the former partner’s evidence is totally irrelevant and hearsay as he did not see anything.

The DPP lawyer in her response to the submission made by the defence lawyer said that it is immaterial that the alleged victim delayed in reporting the matter.

The prosecutor said that the alleged victim had explained that she was scared and did not have the courage taking into account the stature of the accused.

She said the woman got courage to report the matter when she saw the Facebook post and the alleged victim has valid reasons for the delay.

The prosecutor also said that had alleged victim’s complaint been a copy of what was in the Facebook post then she would have made more allegations.

The prosecutor said it is not disputed by the defence that the alleged victim and the accused met on the day of the offence.

She said the woman had testified that the accused was in her personal space and she felt uncomfortable and disgusted.

The woman said events and inconsistencies involving the Brazilian Ambassador are immaterial and at least she had been honest that a mistake was made.