Lawyers wrap up rape case against cop

The closing addresses were given today as the trial of police constable Jason Andre Callender draws to a close. The prosecution pointed the jury to the “inconsistencies” while the defence asked them to analyse the evidence and answer the question: “Is this the behaviour of a person who has been repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted?”

Senior Crown Counsel Oliver Thomas told the courtthat evidence by the complainant suggested she was raped “over and over forcibly” and that “no consent was obtained in the course of their sexual relationship”.

“She never gave permission to have sex…in her evidence she ‘at times couldn’t get words out but silence doesn’t equal consent’,” he said.

The prosecutor said it was the case of the prosecution that Callender took advantage of the girl.

The 37-year-old officer of 6th Avenue, Durant’s Village, St James denies that he had sexual intercourse with the 16-year-old girl between June 1 and October 7, 2010 without her consent and also denies committing an act of serious indecency against her between October 6 and 7, 10 years ago. Lawyer Samuel Legay and Darwin Edwards represent Callender and Senior Crown Counsel Oliver Thomas along with Crown Counsel Danielle Mottley appear for the Crown.

“He was in control of her mind, body and soul. She was in a position of vulnerability. She had no place to live, she was kicked out by her mother,” Thomas stated. “According to her evidence, her mother didn’t want to pay for her CXC. This is a young person that was vulnerable, in need of assistance so she turned to her sister who was staying with the accused at the time and asked her for lodging. This is not a young girl that was looking for a man,” he added.

Speaking of an ongoing issue in Barbados, Thomas said usually when people hear of a young girl going missing, they assume “this girl ran away to shack up with a man” but few think of “deeper issues” like possible family problems.

He asked the jury not to put the girl in the mind of an adult but that of a 16-year-old child who was vulnerable and afraid.

“Her fear was that she would end up in a foster home if she had reported the matter to the police,” he said.

The senior prosecutor said there were some major inconsistencies in what was put forward to the complainant and what the accused said in his own defence.

The first inconsistency, according to Thomas, related to the evidence given by Callender about taking the girl to his father’s house for lunch every Sunday.

Thomas said this was never put forward to the complainant.

He then spoke of sperm found on one of the complainant’s dresses and added that though no DNA study was done, the sperm could only be the accused’s.

“I put to the accused man…and his initial defence is ‘not my sperm’ but if you said that ya’ll were **** every day and every night then who else’s sperm could it be?,” Thomas charged, noting that there was no suggestion in evidence that the girl was having sex with anyone else.

Failure to produce a recorded statement by Callender was also highlighted by Thomas.

“What accounts for this inconsistency again…his own lawyer never put that forward.”

Another inconsistency, in Thomas’ estimation, was that Callender said he didn’t give the complainant gifts but considered it maintenance to buy food and other essentials. Thomas pointed to the fact that the girl said Callender gave her a chain and money to “jump” at Crop Over.

Legay, in his submissions, asked the jury to look at the complainant’s behavior. He suggested that the complainant was “comfortable and happy” at Callender’s house and his client’s intentions were pure.

“The sister leaves the house, and according to the complainant, she promised to come back. If my sister is leaving what do you think I would do? If I wasn’t comfortable I would want to go too because I ain’t comfortable being with the man. But no, she doesn’t do that. She stays in the house…she had keys; she can go whenever she wished. Is that the behavior of someone who has been repeatedly raped?” he pointed out to the jury.

The defence lawyer said the girl had a choice and could’ve called “Barbados Today, CBC, The Nation” or police” at the slightest opportunity.

“If a person is being mistreated regularly why would that person want to stay in that environment? Singing Francine from Barbados, she came up with the song, ‘cows run away, horses run away…when we treating them bad, what about you woman, you could run away too’. What prevented the complainant from running to anyplace, to the police, to her grandmother, to her mother,” he asked.

Legay also spoke of the evidence by Dr Jasmine Crump the doctor who said that the girl admitted she was sexually active.

“Crump’s report said she examined her. There were no tears, no bruises, no laceration of the vulva and vagina…but yet they want us to believe that this man is a beast. You are examined…and you don’t tell the doctor that you were raped, all you did was tell her you were sexually active,” he said.

He also considered the girl’s evidence that the alleged incidents went on from April until October: “Do you believe she was in some form of discomfort all these months?” Legay asked.

Justice Christopher Birch will sum up the case tomorrow at 9:15 a.m.