Defence keeps woman initiated intercourse, closing arguments concentrate on means she don’t fight or yell no
Warning: This tale contains visual language and content that is disturbing.
Regina prosecutor Randene Zielke argued that to get Gioulian Nikdima not liable of intimate attack, Justice Fred Kovach will have to ignore compelling medical evidence and think the alleged victim ended up being, “spiteful and vindictive toward this guy she hardly knew.”
“which can be preposterous, as you would expect,” Zielke said during closing arguments in Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench monday.
Nikdima, 49, happens to be faced with intimate attack causing physical damage.
A 48-year-old Regina girl stated she linked to Nikdima on the web dating website lots of Fish after which came across face-to-face for an initial date in March 2016. She told the court that the coffee date with a charming gentleman ended with him driving her outside town restrictions and raping her.
The girl, whom can’t be identified as a result of a book ban, testified that Nikdima yanked down her jeans and forcibly penetrated her vaginally, pushed her face right down to perform dental intercourse, then penetrated her anally.
“we felt frozen,” the woman testified.
Defence questions ‘inconsistencies’
Defence attorney Barry Nychuk stated in their argument that is closing that female’s testimony is not dependable, pointing to examples by which her wording changed from the time she was initially interviewed by authorities in 2016 to her wording when you look at the 2019 test.
“the data changed. It offers developed. It offers are more damning into the accused, which is due to the reconstruction of her memory,” Nychuk said, arguing that the alleged victim has pieced together a version of activities “that she can now live with.”
Nychuk don’t deal with the fact their customer’s tale changed dramatically throughout the time period that is same.
In the test, Nikdima stated that the lady had been the aggressor and initiated sex, alleging that she yelled, “F–k me, f–k me.” Nikdima failed to share that type of events with police as he ended up being interviewed after their arrest in 2016.
Nychuk devoted a lot of their 46 minutes of dental submissions towards the reality the lady did not you will need to try to escape, fight the man off, or repeatedly yell “no.”
He argued the lady did not state her to do so that she explicitly told Nikdima “no” until after a police officer prompted.
You would need to think that she actually is a crazy, spiteful, vindictive individual.
– Randene Zielke, Senior Crown Prosecutor
He argued that your ex description of exactly just exactly exactly how Nikdima picked her up “like a cloth doll” and manoeuvred her around into the backseat so that he could penetrate her from behind had been “illogical.”
“she actually is a non-willing, non-actively participating person who is ‘frozen’. although I do not quite recognize that. and yet my customer has the capacity to grab her,” Nychuk claims, conveying doubt. “It does not add up.”
Nychuk additionally questioned the girl credibility considering her description that she experienced the backseat regarding the car to obtain her bag in place of attempting to hightail it in the field that is open.
Kovach stopped Nychuk at that true point, and stated, “But was not her phone in her bag?”
Alleged victim is ‘credible and dependable’
Zielke, a senior Crown prosecutor, argued that the alleged victim had been “credible and dependable” and that her testimony had been sustained by corroborating proof, including accidents documented within an exam that is five-hour.
Intimate attack nursing assistant examiner Stephanie Carlson told the court she seen an external anal injury as large as the one found on this woman that she has conducted more than 600 rape exams and only once before has.
Zielke took problem using the defence’s step-by-step distribution about what the lady “didn’t do” and stated consent that is”implied is perhaps perhaps maybe not centered on legislation.
“Consent just isn’t the lack of ‘no.’ It may be the existence of ‘yes,’ ” Zielke said.
The prosecutor cited the Supreme Court’s directives on what permission must certanly be acquired. The court that is highest has ruled that too little opposition will not indicate permission and therefore permission that is provided under duress or predicated on fear will not qualify as true permission. In this situation, the alleged victim stated she ended up being terrified.
The Supreme Court additionally stipulates that consent for starters intimate work is maybe perhaps perhaps not universal permission for many intimate functions.
Justice Kovach interrupted Zielke many times to explain that when he thinks Nikdima’s declare that the girl stated “f–k me personally, f–k me personally” so it would count as explicit, maybe not suggested, permission.
Zielke countered by urging the judge to think about the plausibility regarding the guy’s testimony as he stated the lady guided their penis easily into her anal area, without lubrication or force.
“This is merely perhaps perhaps not believable. Why ended up being she hurt therefore poorly?”
Alleged target’s motive
Zielke stated the lady failed to embellish or exaggerate exactly what took place. She cited examples that are several that your female’s actions had been in line with her tale, rather than the guy’s.
For instance, Nikdima reported that he agreed to make use of a condom but that the girl said and refused, “I’m safe.” Zielke stated the person’s tale is not legitimate because the girl invested per year following the so-called attack undergoing bloodstream work and evaluating for sexually transmitted conditions, actions that aren’t in keeping with a person who voluntarily foregone a condom.
As soon as the girl got house, she removed her Plenty of Fish account instantly.
Zielke additionally questioned what motive the girl will have to falsely accuse a person that she hardly knew, and topic herself towards the humiliation and intrusion of the intercourse attack exam, numerous authorities interviews, an initial hearing and an extended test that, entirely, spanned 3 years.
“You would need to think that she actually is a crazy, spiteful, vindictive individual.”
Kovach is planned to produce the verdict on 5 september.