A High Court judge has discharged the jury in a rape trial after ruling that a significant legal error by the prosecution had the potential to prejudice the case. A new trial date has been set for September 25, 2025.
The defendant, a man in his early 30s, is facing charges of rape and serious indecency involving a female adult in her 20s. The complainant alleges that after a night of drinking with friends, she was asleep when she became aware that someone was having sexual intercourse with her.
The trial was brought to an abrupt halt after the defence raised objections to the prosecution’s reference to a “recent complaint” made by the alleged victim, a concept long abolished under Antigua and Barbuda’s legal system.
Defence attorney Wendel Robinson told Antigua.news that he described the prosecution’s approach as “gravely prejudicial” and argued that it undermined the accused’s right to a fair trial. Justice Annmarie Smith agreed, noting that Antigua is the only country in the Eastern Caribbean to have abolished the old common law rule of recent complaints and emphasized that this change had been in effect for decades.
“This was a grave error,” the judge said, adding that the prosecution should have exercised greater caution in presenting its case.
Shortly before discharging the jury, the judge reportedly warned the prosecutor against introducing prejudicial material. Following the misstep, the court had no choice but to end the current trial and schedule a retrial for later this year.
Our jackass prosecutors strike again. Lord have mercy!
Can someone please simplify for this common Dunce, cause… me nah understand.
Smdh. Hopefully that teaches you a lesson to be more alert. If you think you had too much to drink got home or at your mother home or somewhere where u trust the person.
In NO way am I blaming you. Just saying stay alert
Justice Smith was absolutely right to discharge the jury. You can’t bend the rules even if you believe someone is guilty. That’s not justice.
Bullshii. But anyway, its anything, nothing makes sense and everything is bullshii
I really like how Wendell knows his shit. Boss tagline goes somethinh like “even though they say you do it, you might not be guilty”
This is a textbook example of why procedural fairness is critical. Even if the evidence is compelling, introducing inadmissible concepts like ‘recent complaint’ can derail the entire case.
Sometimes when I read these articles I stage a whole movie in my head. It’s really cray cray