RAPE CASE
Background
A teenage girl at the age of 15 years was interviewed where she gave the following statement, “I was selling the bananas just as usual on Saturday 11th May when one of my customers asked me why I was doing this. I informed him that my mother had been sick for quit a long time while my father run away when my mother was pregnant of our last born. I was doing this to buy food to my family as well as medicines to my mother. He then told me that he wished to speak to my mother that he know how he is going to help us, and so thinking it was a good thing when he asked me to get into his car that he may drive me home I did it without any question in my mind. I therefore showed him the route to our home where he didn’t stop at the gate as he told me that he wanted to do a little shopping that he may take it to my mother then we shall come back. To my surprise he took me into a hotel and we went into to a room where he ordered food for both of us. He then told me that he wanted to do something good and so he asked me to remove my clothes. He then started touching me and he told me not to make any noise as I would enjoy his touch” (Ronald & Stephen, 2002).
After some uncontrollable tears the teenage continued, “After some minutes he removed his pant and when I attempted to scream, he put some cotton wool with him to my mouth. He then raped me and left me unconscious in the room, and when I regained my consciousness I was in the hospital.” Mr. Dave had been found guilty of the offence by the Trial Court for assaulting the teenage girl and therefore the sentence demanded life imprisonment according to the constitution and the evidence provided (Siegel, 2008). According to him he was innocent as he claimed that he had never met the teenage anytime in his life and the girl must be telling lies concerning him. The hotel which he was said to have lodged was the one which had given his details from their records where the girl confirmed that he was the man who raped her. He however appealed through his lawyer to the Supreme Court against the ruling of the Trial Court as he said that he was innocent. The Supreme Court granted the appeal on retrial of the accused through its judicial council (Moorti, 2002).
Constitutional Questions
There is however some constitutional questions which were raised by this case at the Supreme Court. The legal question raised in this case was whether it was legally accepted to make a conclusion on that the accused after appealing and the case filed was convicted? This question is relevant by the fact that that the ruling made by the Trial Court had found him guilt clear of logical suspicion. It is however not legally correct to term him as convicted until when the Supreme Court judges rule on the same. The innocence of the accused at this particular case is presumed as one of constitutional right like any other right of a human being (Ronald, & Stephen, 2002).
Apart from the legal question on the case the ethical questions at this case are also raised. It is difficult to state who is the victim in this case by the fact that even after the accused was convicted by the trial court he appealed as innocent. The question is who could be termed ethically as the victim between the accused and the accuser? Between these two parties one of them could be termed as the liar which depends how smart one proves to be (Ronald, & Stephen, 2002). In this state both the accused and the accuser hold equal privacy rights constitutionally. It is however unethical to publicize or to disclose any information concerning the two parties to the public. The victim in the rape case is always known after the ruling is made by the supreme judge. This raises another question whether it is just for the accused to be free constitutionally when he might have committed the offence. While since the supreme court is the final judge its ruling therefore is also final and constitutionally accepted thus in which way it is right. In either way however the accused is always viewed as an outcast in the society (Siegel, 2008).
Court’s Decision
After the hearing of the case and the prove of evidences on both parties- the accused and the accuser- the judicial ruling ruled in favor of the teenage girl and termed Dave who was accused as a convicted rapist. The sentence was even increased from the life imprisonment in to death sentence. The judicially argued that a rape case is a fate that can be compared to death as this leaves the victim in trauma the rest of the life. Such sentence constitutionally was viewed to serve as an example to the rest of the society to avoid such acts. At the same time it is inhuman to rape someone and more so a young teenage as she is exposed to many effects including death (Moorti, 2002).
Whereas the ruling was meant to cause some positive constitutional significance, it could also cause some negative significance on the same. One of the negative significant would be increased of death cases after a rape. After one is raped then the rapist would kill her as he knows the sentence to such an offence is death, therefore he better kill the victim thus there would be no enough evidence that he did the offence. By equating a rape with death where the rapist is sentenced to death, then the rape survivors might be viewed by the society as good as dead. (Robinson, 2008).
References
Moorti, S. ( 2002). Color of rape: gender and race in television’s public spheres. New York: Suny Press.
Robinson, B. (2008, May 06). Executing child rapists: Motivation. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/executn.htm.
Ronald, M. & Stephen, T. (2002). Profiling violent crimes: an investigative tool. New York: Sage.
Siegel, L. J. (2008). Criminology. New York: Cengage Learning.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]