Taitung District Court. (Photo by reporter Huang Mingtang)
A divorced man in Taitung was accused of sexual assault by his underage daughter, and his ex-wife testified. However, due to civil disputes such as protection orders, matrimonial litigation, distribution of remaining property, and alimony, as well as contradictions in his daughter's testimony, the first and second instance judges both confirmed that the testimony was contaminated and could not be used as evidence, and both acquitted him.
Prosecutors alleged that between 108 and 110 years ago, the man repeatedly had sexual intercourse and molestation with his daughter while she was sleeping or unable to resist due to taking psychiatric drugs. After the trial, the court pointed out that there were fundamental and major differences in the victim's previous statements during police inquiries, interrogations, and court trials, regarding the time when the victimization occurred, the form of the violation, whether it was molestation or penetration of fingers and genitals, whether there was resistance, and whether the defendant ejaculated.
In addition, the court found from the information in the file and the conversation records of the communication software LINE that the victim's uncle had a lot of leading and closed-ended questions in the conversation between the two parties, and spent more than a year constantly asking her for details. It is difficult to rule out the possibility that her testimony was contaminated by external information or continuous questioning. The judge believed that civil disputes such as protection orders, matrimonial proceedings, residual property distribution and alimony between the defendant and his ex-wife and her relatives were in a state of highly antagonistic interests for a long time, and there were attempts to induce questioning. Therefore, the testimony was not enough to strengthen the victim's accusation.
Prosecutors pointed out that the hospital's psychiatric report alleged that she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and that it was highly related to the sexual assault experience. The judge also believed that she was facing the divorce of her parents, family changes and multiple life pressures at the same time, and it was impossible to directly infer that the defendant had indeed committed a harmful autonomous crime based on the results of the mental evaluation alone.
Based on the presumption of innocence in the Criminal Procedure Law and the principle of "if the evidence is doubtful, it is beneficial to the defendant", the second-instance court ultimately upheld the acquittal verdict of the first-instance trial and rejected the prosecutor's appeal. The court also emphasized in the conclusion of the judgment that the upholding of the not guilty verdict was limited by the insufficient existing evidence, which by no means negated the pain and physical and mental trauma suffered by the victim. It hoped that the victim and his family could continue to heal through professional psychological resources and return to a stable life as soon as possible.
☆Free Electronic News cares about you: If you suspect that a child has been subjected to physical abuse, mental abuse, or sexual assault or harassment, please call the 113 hotline. Through professional social worker connection services, children in life crisis can be rescued as soon as possible. ☆
