Man cleared of rape charge
A man who had been accused of raping a 22-year-old Japanese language student woman was cleared by a court today after the magistrate decided that what had taken place was consensual.
Oreste Fenech, 27 of Sliema, had been accused of raping the girl on a bench at the marina in Gzira in August 2005.
The court said the evidence indicated that the two had consensual sex and no violence was used. Indeed, the incident was reported days after it allegedly happened. The woman had pleaded that she had not realised what was happening and was ill. She also claimed the man had committed lewd acts.
The court said she found it difficult to believe that the man could have commited the acts described by the woman against her will.
Mr Fenech was however found guilty of offending public morals and was conditionally discharged for three years..
8 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Edward Pavia
Oct 29th 2009, 21:19
Strange case in that it beggers believe that it has taken more than 4 years for this case to be resolved in court. This poor man had this serious charge hanging over his head for that length of time. I suppose he was under strict bail conditions too. I totally agree that if a person makes false allegations against another then for justice to be seen to be done or as a deterent to others, there must be some sort of charge taken against them such as making a false allegation or perverting justice. As for Mr Anton Cassar comment, I don't know what the law is in Malta but in most Countries if two people have sex in a public place they are both charged with offending public decency because it's the behaviour of both with any disregard to the public that is deemed offensive and not who exposed what.
t. borg
Oct 29th 2009, 20:45
ghalhekk huwa hazin li persuna jissemmha b'isimha meta jitressaq il-qorti minkejja li jkun ghadu innocenti. il-ligi trid tinbidel u l-media ma tkunx tista' ssemmi persuna akkuzata imma meta tinstab hati biss. dan peress li malta zghira u kulhadd jaf lil xulxin. wara kollox ahna insara jew le!! zgur li certi nies ma jafux xi tfisser tmur il-habs fuq kazijiet bhal dawn u l-persekuzjoni familjari.
Joseph Schembri
Oct 29th 2009, 18:53
The report and the comments below beg the question: 'Why is the name of the man mentioned but not of the name of the woman?" It seems clear that she is the party guilty of any wrongdoing (false report) here.
It would also be interesting if reporters included the name of lawyers and magistrates involved in the court case.
C Camilleri
Oct 29th 2009, 18:14
Tajba din, 'she had not realised what was happening and was ill'!! Kulhadd jilghaba tal miskin
Miguel Micallef
Oct 29th 2009, 17:40
@Anton Cassar
HUH???
Clearly the woman wasn't charged because our laws are sexist. Everyone knows this.
anton cassar
Oct 29th 2009, 16:26
Hehe... tajba din Mr Casha.Very simple,the man has to expose himself to have some fun & the woman doesn`t.
I hope you understood now.
John Micallef
Oct 29th 2009, 15:53
At this point are the police going to take action againt the woman for making a false report & keep her responable for the expensis to investige her false report??
Or we are bananas even in this simple logic? So im pay this myself trough my tax is it!
Ramon Casha
Oct 29th 2009, 15:42
Why was the man - but not the (unnamed) woman - found guilty of offending public morals?