Palaver Report-De Villiers vs. State

no consequences to the authorities involved.

We hope that this report will open the eyes of the media, the public, and any legal representative.

Rape in itself is something that people do not want to talk about. We at Palaver understand that some women and children are going through this. We will never condone such behaviour, but would it be a fair thing to assume that all people (men) who are accused of such a crime is automatically guilty? Should the test in matters like this not be done with a much higher standard to get to the truth? It is easy to cry “rape”. The questions we asked ourselves was; 1. Did David rape Kayla?

2. What evidence do we have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did rape, Kayla?

3. What evidence did the accused have to prove the latter?

4. Was Kayla honest?

5. Was Kayla’s testimony consistent?

Did she have any witnesses who could corroborate her testimony?

Was the evidence that was used good enough to prove the crime?

We can say with confidence and accuracy that none of the answers we got from the assessment of this case fell in favour of Kayla. She was not honest, she was not consistent, she lied, she made stuff up which she confirmed she was doing. Kayla had no corroboration. The documents that were used was poor and provisionally accepted. The State had a person who was over-emotional for reasons we cannot say.

There was more than enough evidence led by the defence to create a lot of doubt and proof that the accused in fact did not rape Kayla, nor did he have a sexual relationship with Kayla.

All this is from the Judgement, and it is for that reason we are firmly pointing out that David is innocent.

PAGE 116 - De Villiers vs State - Palaver Report