Woman tears husband’s testicle and gets a suspended sentence

An elderly man had his testicle saved by doctors at Mater Dei hospital after being assaulted by his wife, who is 20 years his junior.

The incident happened on 25 September last year after the couple had an argument on the balcony at their home in St Julians.

The man had been informed by doctors that he risked losing his left testicle. A consultant told the court that the left testicle was hanging out of the scrotum and “it was covered with pus”.

However, doctors managed to save the testicle after operating on the man.

His wife, Eva Langridge Stastna, 51, was charged with causing grievous bodily harm. Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech handed down a two-year prison sentence suspended for four years on the basis that the woman was a first-time offender.

I was begging her to stop, she’s got long fingernails and I’m telling you it was agony the victim

The woman was also ordered to submit to psychological treatment for her violent outbursts and placed under a three-year restraining order.

The man told the court that at the time he was frequently arguing with his wife, who was blaming him for the fact that her son was not successful at school.

On the night, the couple argued on their balcony with the woman accusing her husband of being a paedophile and a drug addict. The argument went on for about an hour.

As he left the balcony to go into the kitchen, she had blocked the way by standing in the door way.

When he had attempted to get past her a couple of times, she punched him on the left side of his head and pulled at his hair. The man tried to restrain her but this developed into a tussle with the accused scratching him on his legs, chest and hands.

The bruises and abrasions remained visible to the court despite the fact that he had testified over a month after the incident.

The court heard how the accused had kicked the man below the knee whilst also biting him on his arm, “shaking her head whilst his arm was firmly in her mouth”.

“I was trying to get her head off my arm and a few seconds later she got my testicles, my private parts, she managed to get her hands inside my shorts and she started pulling like crazy. Eventually I was begging her to stop, she’s got long fingernails and I’m telling you it was agony,” the man testified.

He asked her a few times to stop because “this is too painful”.

When she stopped, Langridge Stastna stood up and looked at him. The man was still on the floor as she walked away.

“I gradually stood up with difficulty and I told her that I needed an ambulance,” the man told the court.

The woman did not offer assistance and the man retreated to the bedroom to get his mobile and call for help. Langridge Stastna simply stood and stared at him.

He could not find his keys or wallet and by that time he needed to rest so he remained on the bed. It was later that he noticed that the sheets were stained with blood.

Woman’s version is ‘fiction’

In assessing the case, the court noted that the injured party was a frail 71-year-old while his wife was a 51-year-old of sturdy build.

The court dismissed as “incredulous at best,” the accused’s version of events in which she omitted to mention the altercation and simply said that the next day he had told her he was not feeling well.

“The accused’s testimony jars dramatically with reality: She admits that when her husband informed her he was going to the polyclinic she didn’t ask him why. She failed to mention how one could possibly suffer all those injuries… she fails to mention as even seeing, the multiple scratches on the face, arms and hands,” the court said.

The court said it found the testimony of the accused both unsafe and unsatisfactory. Her demeanour on the witness stand failed to convince the court of her genuineness and credibility, her continuous denial that any incident took place notwithstanding the injuries, which were sustained by her husband who, by her own admission, never left the house, “render her account of events nothing but a product of fiction, yet a fiction riddled with non-sequiturs”.

The magistrate said the court had a zero-tolerance approach to domestic violence. Criticising the prosecution, it said it could not but note that the accused had not been charged with offences against the abuse of the elderly and dependent persons, which carry punishments of greater severity than those with which the accused stands charged. 

“There is to be no place for such demented actions, for frenzied attacks on persons who due to age or other circumstances can’t even be assured protection within the confines of their own homes, attacks on individuals who suffer aggression from those to whom they entrust their care and companionship.”