Colin Mack rape trial …Accused to know fate on Monday

Jan 31, 2015 News

---

Lawyers involved in the Colin Mack rape trial made their closing arguments yesterday.

Mack, who is on trial before Justice Navindra Singh and a mixed 12-member Jury at the High Court in Georgetown, will know his fate on Monday. Mack is charged with the rape, assault and forcible abduction of a female.
According to the indictment, Mack had sexual intercourse with a 19-year-old without her consent on April 12, 2009.
The matter is being prosecuted by State Attorneys Stacy Gooding, Mercedes Thompson and Diana Kaulesar.
The state is contending that the victim was abducted and taken to a house in Festival City where she was held against her will. The teen claimed that she was held for several hours in the house where the accused allegedly raped and assaulted her.
The teen said that she shouted for help, but no one came to her rescue even though the houses were within close proximity. She says that she managed to escape after a taxi driver came to her rescue.
On Tuesday, the victim (now 25 years old), gave the court a detailed account of the alleged rape.  The woman had related that she met the accused on the road two days before the incident and they had exchanged phone numbers.
She recalled that on April 11, 2009 Mack called and invited her to a reggae show. She accepted. She said that the accused picked her up and took her to show later that evening.
The woman told the court that she subsequently agreed to go with the accused to the Latino Bar and Blue Iguana, but after a while she requested to go home and the two left the club.  The woman testified that Mack took her to his Festival City residence instead, where he dragged her by her hair out of the car, carried her up a stairs and raped her even though she resisted.
The complainant said that Mack forced her into a front bedroom of the house.  She further related that she continued to fight the accused off who began to “forcefully” remove her clothes.  She told the court that Mack slammed her onto the bed and tried to pry her legs open to have sex with her.
The witness said that after a few minutes of being unsuccessful Mack left the room.
She said he returned some time later with another female. She said that after “taking me to the back bedroom”, Mack told the other woman to perform oral sex on her. The victim said that the female did as she was instructed. She said that she was crying at the time and the accused threatened to kill her if she didn’t stop crying.
According to the woman, before the accused could have penetrated her, she asked him to use a condom and he did.   When asked to state her reason for doing so she told the court that she just wanted to be safe since she was in a helpless situation.
The witness said that she felt “helpless” as the accused proceeded to have “sexual intercourse with me without my consent.”
Sometime after the incident, the victim said that she attempted to escape through a window since the house was locked.
A medical report which tendered as evidence before the court detailed that the victim had lacerations to her vagina, swelling to the right eye and abrasions to her left elbow— injuries consistent with assault.
However on Thursday, while leading his defence Mack told the court that he was innocent of the charge. He claims that he had consensual and “legal sex,” with the woman.
Yesterday, lawyers representing both victim and the accused pointed to inconsistencies contained in the evidence, which was provided to the court.
Defence Attorney Peter Hugh pointed out inconsistencies in the evidence provided to the court by the victim. He pointed out that there were a number of inconsistencies in the statements which the victim provided to the High Court and the initial statements she gave to the police.
Hugh reminded the jury that the victim said that she could not find her underwear after the incident, that the young lady who was in the house had handed it to her, but that later under cross examination she admitted that she told the Magistrate a different story- that she did indeed find her underwear before leaving Mack’s house.
The lawyer also pointed out that the victim said that she never tried to call anyone as she was being transported to the home of the accused even though no one had restricted her from using her cell phone at that time.
State Attorney, Mercedes Thompson, urged the jury to use their common sense and good judgment when considering the evidence.
She noted that if the accused is to be found guilty of the allegation, the State must prove by the evidence provided that Mack had sex with the complainant without her consent.
The Attorney noted that Mack in his defence painted a picture of two lovers having consensual sex but noted that the victim bore injuries about her body.
“Where did these injuries come from?” the Prosecutor asked, pointing out that the victim had bruises on her body and the swelling to her right eye, bruises and lacerations to her vaginal area.
Thompson said that Mack had said that when he and the victim left the club at around 4:00 am the place was already bright thus, the victim requested to go to his house since she didn’t want to be seen coming out of a hotel at that hour.
“I don’t know which part of the world Colin Mack is from but 4:00 am …you and I both know what the place looks like.”
The Prosecutor added that Mack had told the court that after leaving the club the victim asked him whether he had condoms and he stopped at a cheese shop to buy a pack.   “What type of cheese shop would be selling condoms at that hour of the morning?” she asked.
Thompson further noted that in his testimony the accused said he and the victim were wining and kissing on each other at the club; he said that they were “hot and bothered,” still when they got to his house they took time to shower before sex.
At one point of the address, Mack asked to be excused; he left the courtroom and was followed by his Attorney.
The State Prosecutor continued to point out that Mack had explained that he was awakened by another young woman who told him that his girlfriend (the victim) let her in the house, but said not long after that, the complainant tried to jump through the window because she could not find the keys.
“Where did the keys vanish all of a sudden?” Thompson asked as she noted that the complainant had attempted to jump through a window in a bid to escape from “the man who claimed she had consensual sex with him.”
This, the Prosecutor said, was yet another desperate attempt by the accused to provide a logical explanation to place the other young lady at the house.
“Why did she attempt to jump through a window when she could have gone to the man whom she just had loving sex with to let her out?”
The case is set for deliberations by the Jury on Monday.

---

---