A young girl told the High Court that a neighbour  raped her at her home in February 2023 while she was menstruating, in testimony given as part of an ongoing trial where the defence has challenged her account.

According to Wadadli Case Files, the complainant described the accused as a neighbour she saw often but rarely interacted with, since she tended to stay indoors. She told the court that on the day in question she was 14  and at home alone waiting for dance practice when the defendant knocked on her door asking for her aunt. When she told him her aunt wasn’t home, she said, he pushed his way inside and assaulted her in her grandmother’s room, ignoring her pleas to stop. She said she was in pain from menstruating and the intercourse exacerbated the pain. 

The defence, led by attorney Sherfield Bowen, focused heavily on inconsistencies between what the complainant initially told police and the fuller account she gave later. Under cross-examination, she acknowledged that her first statement to police described a lesser incident, that the defendant had touched her before realising she was menstruating and leaving. She agreed this account omitted what she says truly happened.

The defence suggested this discrepancy stemmed from the complainant trying to conceal an unrelated matter, that a boy, a school friend, had visited her at home that day in violation of a house rule. She acknowledged fearing punishment over the visit but firmly denied that this was the reason she changed her account, testifying that she only gave the full story once she learned she would undergo a medical examination and after speaking to her grandmother who was the person she was comfortable confiding in. She also said that her fear centred on the possibility that the defendant might return and hurt her.

In re-examination, she maintained there was nothing romantic between her and the boy, describing their time together as watching television and talking about school before he left.

The complainant’s aunt, with whom she lived, also testified. She told the court that after the incident, the defendant called her directly, telling her the complainant was trying to frame him for rape and denying any wrongdoing. She said he later sent voice notes asking her to accompany him to the police station to clear his name. Under cross-examination, she denied ever being told beforehand that a boy had visited the home, and denied disciplining her niece frequently or that the teen feared her.

Responding to a jury question, the aunt explained that the defendant had obtained her phone number after once misplacing his own phone and using hers to call himself.

A third witness, the complainant’s step-aunt, testified that she was contacted after the incident and found the complainant visibly upset. She said she took the teen to the police station, after which she was examined at a clinic and later stayed with her for a period. Under cross-examination, she confirmed she was present when the complainant’s police statement was taken and signed as a witness, and that she was later shown the statement, in which the complainant had told police the defendant left after realising she was menstruating.