Untitled design (11)

“Hugged from Behind”: Accused Is Released as “Molesting” Allegations Disintegrate

The ruling of a lower court that cleared a ministry employee accused of abusing a female coworker at work was affirmed by the Court of Cassation. The victim stated in the case file that she entered a room meant for clocking herself out before leaving the office at the conclusion of working hours. She was startled to feel someone throw his arms around her waist and give her a surprise hug as soon as she inserted her card into the clock-out gadget. She cried out and bolted from the workplace, telling her husband what had happened over the phone. He instructed her to pick up their kids from their school.

When the husband was questioned during the investigation, he gave the explanation that his wife had contacted him at 1:30 pm to tell him what had occurred to her. He went to his wife’s place of employment and saw the man who had given his wife an embrace after sending her off to pick up the kids. The accused attacked and insulted him when he came up to him and begged to be called by name. Upon being questioned, the witness stated that the victim had contacted him at 1:00 or 12:30 pm to tell him what the accused had done to her, adding that she had been crying and shouting. Upon being questioned, the defendant refuted the allegations.

He clarified that the woman requested him to clock out one of her coworkers when she arrived at 1:25 pm on the day of the incident. Refusing, he threw her out of the office. He was adamant that her claims were untrue. Lawyer Ali Al-Wawan, the defendant’s defense attorney, claimed that there was insufficient concrete proof of guilt in the indictment papers to establish that his client had performed the conduct against the plaintiff. He emphasized that the indictment evidence, which was used by the Public Prosecution to convict his client, was insufficient to prove his case.

Attorney Al-Wawan emphasized the discrepancy between the victim’s and witnesses’ testimony, maintaining that his client’s accusation was untrue. Through his plea, he reaffirmed that the trial court has the authority to determine the trial court’s weight or assessment of the witness’s statements and that, in criminal cases, it is sufficient for the trial court to question the legitimacy of charging the accused in order to acquit him. This is established in the Court of Cassation. The issue here is based on the court’s confidence in the evidence, so long as the court’s decision indicates that it carefully considered the case, weighed the evidence of denial against the evidence of proof that supported the accusation, and gave the accused’s defense the benefit of the doubt—or that it was suspicious of the elements of proof.


Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *