PHILIPSBURG – The public prosecutor demanded 3 years of imprisonment against Ashworth R. for raping a 19-year old girl on December 19 of last year. The defendant says the girl seduced him; the prosecutor spoke of “a brutal rape.” The court pronounces its verdict on April 18.
The prosecution charges that R., 49, took the girl under threat of a firearm to his house and raped her. The defendant had another story: the girl had just worked one day for him and immediately asked him where he lived. So he claimed to have taken her to his home where she allegedly seduced hm.
The victim did not immediately report the rape, but three days later a medical examination still showed sign of abrasions to her private parts that are consistent with forced penetration.
“Why would a young girl whom you thought was a lesbian fall for a man of almost fifty?” an exasperated judge asked the defendant. There was no clear answer to that one.
Testimonies describe R. as a man who thinks about women all day long and who drinks a lot. He defendant was allegedly also under the influence when he allegedly raped the girl.
The prosecutor spoke of a brutal rape, referred to the medical report and noted that an investigation at the crime scene – the defendant’s home – returned information that is consistent with statements made by the victim.
“He was the boss, she was his subordinate,” the prosecutor said. He held the difference in age and the defendant’s dominant position as well as the fact that he had not told investigators the truth against him.
Attorney Geert Hatzmann struggled with his defense, because he did not want to discredit the reliability of the victim’s statement. “I am not going to do some mud-slinging,” he said, “But I have a few critical remarks.”
The attorney noted that, while the prosecutor maintains that his client had threatened the girl with a gun, no firearm was found at his home. “My client is depicted as a predator who is unable to control his lust under the influence of alcohol.”
The lack of the gun is an important point against the prosecution construction of the evidence, Hatzmann said. he also wondered how his client, if he had been drunk as the prosecution claims, could have stayed in control of the situation. “And afterwards they went together to Subway to eat a sandwich. That doesn’t make sense, but the desire to arrive at a conviction in sexual assault cases is always very strong.”
There is also no physical evidence, Hatzmann pointed out: “No DNA, no sperm; we only have the victim’s complaint. It is her word against his word. I understand the underbelly sentiment but there is insufficient evidence. I ask your court to acquit my client.”
