Appeal Court concludes hearing arguments against rape conviction

May 04, 2019 News

The hearing of former cameraman Andre Hetsberger’s appeal, against a High Court decision to convict and sentence him to 25 years’ imprisonment

Andre Hetsberger

for raping a 13-year-old girl, was heard yesterday by Chief Justice Roxane George and Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Rishi Persaud at the Court of Appeal in Kingston, Georgetown.
In 2016, a 12-member jury found Hetsberger guilty of the crime, and he was thereafter sentenced to imprisonment by High Court Judge Navindra Singh. The offence was committed in 2014 and came to light after the girl, then 13, had alleged that Hetsberger had sexually molested her. To prove its case, the prosecution relied on serious circumstantial evidence, and the testimony of the victim insisted that the convict penetrated her one day.
At a hearing yesterday, Hetsberger through his lawyer, Dexter Todd, argued that Justice Singh admitted evidence by the prosecution which was highly prejudicial to him, and more so refused to admit evidence which supported his defence. The lawyer further argued that Justice Singh failed to put his client’s case adequately, or at all, to the jury for consideration.
In light of these, Todd insists that the verdict of the jury was unreasonable and cannot be supported with regard to the evidence, and that the sentence was unduly served. In this regard, he is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside and/or reverse the decision of the High Court. In addressing the court, Todd said that the trial Judge erred in certain findings.
For one, Todd pointed out that a medical certificate, which indicated that the victim showed no signs of penetration was tendered into evidence by the prosecution. On the other hand, he said that there was the victim’s account of what transpired, in that, she was penetrated. According to Todd, the victim’s testimony was inconsistent with the medical certificate, and as such, the trial judge should have relied on the latter.
But State Prosecutor Natasha Backer was in disagreement. She argued that the victim’s testimony cannot be discredited since the Sexual Offence Act allows for evidence of such nature. According to the prosecutor, it is possible for someone who was sexually penetrated to not show signs of injuries.
In relation to the sentence, Todd contended that it was severe. In support of this argument, he took issue with the fact that no probation report was prepared on his client’s background. However, Prosecutor Backer told the court that she was not aware that a probation report could have caused Hetsberger to receive a lighter sentence. Nevertheless, the court will make a ruling on June 26.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News