Child rapist loses appeal against seven-year sentence

The Court of Appeal has confirmed a seven-year jail sentence handed to a convicted child rapist.

The man had been convicted three years ago of having raped an 11-year-old girl in Zabbar, in December 2005 and sentenced him to a seven-year jail term.

The man had filed an appeal, arguing amongst other things, that the girl had been inconsistent in her testimony. 

Police had started investigating after the girl had told her mother how a family friend had taken her to a garage, where he then raped her in a car. Mr Justice David Scicluna ruled that the fact that the girl had revealed the details over time did not mean that she should not be believed. The Court observed that the girl’s description of how the man had touched her and the pain she had felt was convincing.

The judge refused the defence’s assertion that the evidence given by a doctor who examined the girl should be discarded on the basis of his not being a gynaecologist.

A doctor had testified to finding two vaginal tears, which the Court held, indicated that there had been some penetration – a requisite for a rape conviction – at least to an extent. Maltese legal doctrine is consistent in that full penetration was not necessary for the crime of rape to be completed. 

Despite claiming diminished responsibility due to the fact that he had psychiatric problems that impaired his impulse control, the man had known what he was doing and the evidence indicated that he appeared to have planned his crime said the court. 

The seven-year sentence was upheld, the court holding that the accused be held at the Mount Carmel Forensic Unit in order to be given the necessary treatment for his condition.