A man was cleared of raping an English language student he had just danced with at a party, after the prosecution failed to prove that the sex had not been consensual.

Anas Alahmad met the young French woman at a Qawra party on the eve of the May 1 public holiday. 

Two days later the woman went to a police station to report that the man who had offered her a lift home after the party had allegedly forced her to have sex and punched her in the face when she tried to resist. 

Following the alleged ordeal inside his car, the woman got home and went to bed, waking up the next morning to find that her mobile was missing.

The device was traced to the Msida police station.

When filing her report, the alleged victim identified the aggressor from photos.

The man, who had dropped off the woman’s mobile phone at the Msida police station, was questioned and subsequently charged with rape, violent indecent assault, holding his alleged victim against her will, slightly injuring her, offending public morals and decency as well as driving his BMW under the influence of drink or drugs.

He pleaded not guilty, insisting that the sex had been consensual and that the woman had in fact been dancing with him “provocatively” at the party. 

The alleged victim testified via video conferencing, recalling how she had first met the accused at the party where she had gone with friends and where she had been drinking. 

She claimed that her drink must have been spiked and she had very hazy memories of the evening, especially what had taken place towards the end of the party.

She added that she had not been feeling well and vaguely recalled someone dragging her up some stairs towards a car. She had tripped when reaching the parking area.

The man had undressed her on the backseat of the car, and when she resisted he allegedly punched her in the face and told her she “owed” it to him. 

From then on her memory was not clear, insisting that she was not “half- consenting half-conscious, but drugged.”

Under cross-examination, she could not confirm whether it was the accused who dragged her to the car nor where the alleged sexual assault had taken place. 

A medico-legal expert reported that the woman had bruising above one eye, on her arm and on her knee. She also had an abrasion on her hand.

A DNA expert reported that the sample taken from the woman’s underwear and jeans only matched her genetic profile.

Faced with the contrasting versions, the court, presided over by magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit, observed that the prosecution had failed to produce other witnesses who may shed more light on what actually happened that night.

Besides the parties themselves, only court experts had testified.

The woman’s flatmate, who was meant to have heard her account as soon as she got back home, could have shed light upon her state immediately after the alleged rape, and recall whether she was agitated, scared and sober.

None of her friends, who had accompanied her to the party, had been summoned as witnesses, while no gynaecologist had been appointed to examine the alleged victim to determine whether she had really suffered sexual trauma, observed the court.

'Accused’s version much more consistent'

Basing itself on the evidence put forward, the court concluded that “without any shadow of a doubt” the parties had engaged in sex.

The crux of the issue was whether the sex was consensual or not.

But when all was considered, the court deemed the accused’s version much more consistent than that of the alleged victim who varied “relevant” details to such extent that she contradicted herself.

Her version was unrealistic, said the court, concluding that it could never find the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt upon such a “feeble” account. 

Nor had the prosecution proved his drink-driving.

The court cleared the man of all criminal liability.

Lawyers Alfred Abela and Renè Darmanin were defence counsel.