A man has been cleared of raping a woman five years ago after the alleged victim proved selective and inconsistent in her version, leading to the conclusion that she first “went all the way” and then had a change of heart. 

That night, back in October 2017, Murat Durmaz, a Turkish national studying English in Malta, met the Swedish gaming worker in Paceville where the woman had been clubbing with two other friends. 

She later explained that after several drinks at three different bars, she felt tired and wished to go home. 

That was when she met the accused who went along with her on the ten-minute walk to her apartment.

But on the way, he told her about the lovely view from his rented penthouse nearby and invited her in.

She willingly accepted.

The woman later recalled complimenting him on the property as she walked out to the balcony, sipping a Vodka with lemonade and dipping her hand in the jacuzzi. 

But she could not remember what happened next or how she ended up in bed with the man, undressed and pinned under him.

She said that she resisted his attempt to have sex, but when she started to shout, he allegedly placed a sharp object against her neck and threatened to kill her unless she shut up. 

The alleged victim recalled how she finally grabbed her bag and rushed out in her underpants, finding the outer door closed. 

The accused followed her downstairs, gave her €20, and told her to get dressed and get a taxi home. 

She headed straight to the police. 

Under cross-examination by the defence, the alleged victim confirmed that she had accepted the stranger’s invitation to go to his flat because she “wanted a new friend.” 

She also said that she had been impressed by his apartment, but could not quite remember what they spoke about, whether she had taken off her clothes inside the bedroom before the accused came along. 

She denied taking the accused’s iPhone and stuffing it inside her bra, together with the €20 cash, before she left after the alleged rape. 

She also could not recall if she had sent him a friend request while still at the bar, nor that she had asked for a massage while at the flat and denied asking the accused for €500 after the incident. 

A medico-legal expert confirmed that some 12 hours after the alleged rape, there was a high level of alcohol in the victim’s blood, and that would have been higher earlier on, indicating that the woman was in a “highly intoxicated state.”

Durmaz chose to testify in the proceedings.

He said that that night, around 4am, he entered a Paceville bar where a woman smiled at him and started chatting, asking about his work, life and background. 

She seemed impressed when he told her that he was a “village consul” and when he confirmed that by showing her his Facebook profile, she sent him a friend request. 

They left the bar and walked to ‘Level 22’ finding the place already closed. 

He then invited her to his place and she willingly went along. 

He insisted that sex was consensual, so much so that she had even asked him for a massage. 

Faced with those two conflicting versions the court had to “meticulously” assess the evidence to determine which was the more credible testimony. 

There was no doubt that the woman had willingly accepted the accused invitation, that both had shared a drink as well as intimate acts. 

In fact, in her original version to the police, the woman said that “she was not drunk and that she was responsible for her action… [She] insisted that all she wanted was to be examined by a doctor….and also signed a waiver that she was not interested in criminal proceedings.”

Officers who took down her report testified that she was evidently agitated and not quite coherent, giving the officers two different versions. 

Medical checks don't indicate sex was against her will

The court, presided over by magistrate Joseph Mifsud, observed that although the alleged victim had been out with friends, she seemed to have forgotten all about them and left the club with the accused, a total stranger.”

The court deemed that “she was looking for some adventure that night”.

Their conversation was marked by sexual connotations from the start.

She asked whether the accused was gay, observing that he was alone at the bar, while he jokingly replied, asking whether she was lesbian. The two laughed and walked on.

When testifying, the woman recalled the layout of his flat in detail, but then seemed to suffer “total amnesia”.

She could not remember how from the balcony she ended up in bed. 

When all was considered, the court concluded that her testimony was selective and inconsistent.

It appeared that she first “went all the way” and then later had regrets.

But that did not vitiate nor annul her consent, said the court, adding that although under the influence of alcohol, she was still in control of her actions when she accepted to go to his place, well aware that there was no one else there. 

Medical checks also gave no indication that the sex was against her will. 

On the other hand, the accused was consistent all throughout. 

When all was considered, the court was not morally convinced that this was rape, but rather a case of consensual sex where the alleged victim subsequently changed her mind. 

Lawyers Franco Debono and Marion Camilleri were defence counsel.