Almost six years after he was charged with raping a 19-year-old woman, entertainment promoter Colin Mack will have his fate decided soon, following closing statements at his trial yesterday.
On Monday, a 12-member jury will determine whether a week’s worth of evidence will set the man free or sentence him to time in prison.
Before Justice Navindra Singh, Mack’s attorney Peter Hugh made his closing statement and told the jurors that the only issue was determining whether the sex between Mack and the virtual complainant (VC) was consensual. Hugh opined that the allegation of rape is easy to make but harder to prove.
On Thursday, Mack went into detail about his version of the events, saying the sex between him and the VC had been fully consensual and yesterday Hugh picked up the argument, while pointing out a number of areas in the VC’s story he believed deserved questioning.
According to Hugh, the VC spoke a number of discrepancies such as when she claimed she was dragged by the hair into the house, cuffed, choked and kicked by Mack. However, Hugh said, the policewoman who accompanied the VC to the hospital never mentioned whether violent marks were noticed on the woman’s body which could corroborate her claims. He added that if the woman was indeed brutally handled, marks would have been evident about her body since she was examined by a doctor “mere” hours after the incident.
Hugh further argued that the VC’s story was riddled with inconsistencies, from the time the VC left the club with Mack to his house, where the alleged rape took place, to the police station.
For example, he said, he found it troubling that the VC claimed she had found the grille and door to Mack’s house opened when they arrived there. He opined that no one in his right mind would go out and leave his home unsecured. Furthermore, he said if the door was locked, it would have been impossible for Mack to drag the woman into the house and open up the door at the same time.
Hugh also called the VC’s character into question, saying she was a bright young lady filling in gaps with her story.
Hugh told the court he believed the allegation of rape surfaced when the VC noticed a picture of another woman and questioned Mack about it. He said after Mack told her it was his future wife, the VC who, after being “sported” and taken about the place, must have moved from a position of comfort to a position of being cast out, especially when the accused ended the argument with her by telling her to call a taxi and go home. Hugh added that the experience must have been “hurtful.”
On the other hand, State Prosecutor Mercedes Thompson told the court a completely different story during her closing statement.
Thompson told the jurors that on April, 12, 2009, Mack would have brutally raped, assaulted and detained the VC. She said the act carried out by Mack was a cold, calculated and vicious one. She added that Mack was relying on the fact that the VC agreed to go out with him to use to his advantage.
Thompson asked the jurors to consider whether the VC deserved to be raped, simply because she had accepted a ride, went to a club and subsequently to Mack’s home.
Pointing out the injuries stated in the medical report, the prosecutor asked the jury to explain how the VC acquired the injuries if Mack claimed he had consensual sex with her.
Thompson further questioned why the VC attempted to jump through a window while Mack was asleep and possibly cause herself serious injuries after they had what Mack deemed consensual sex. “She was trying to escape!” Thompson asserted, as she pointed out the doors were locked.
Thompson further mentioned the VC went straight to the police station and was then examined by a doctor who corroborated her claim of rape. Thompson added that the woman had also complained to her mother and another man, who also testified during the trial.
During her closing statement, Thompson also pointed out the inconsistencies she found from Mack’s statement.
She said, according to Mack’s evidence, he and the VC were hugging and kissing at the club and he had his hands on her pubic area until they arrived at his home. However, after reaching at his home, they took a shower. That, Thompson said, did not make sense, since all the way to his home the two were “hot and bothered,” according to his evidence.
She further said Mack testified he and the VC had left the club at about 4am and it had been bright at the time. However, Thompson maintained nowhere in Guyana is it bright at 4am. She added that the VC’s timeframe of somewhere between 2:30am to 3am was much more plausible.
The prosecutor further noted that Mack expressed his outrage at all the persons who went into the witness stand to testify again him. Mack had deemed those persons’ testimonies as presumptuous lies. However, Thompson said, when he had a chance to tell his story, Mack opted to give an unsworn statement. She said during his unsworn statement, the accused mentioned information he had not told the police, the very thing he accused the VC and other witnesses of doing.
Furthermore, Thompson said while the sequence of Mack’s story matched up, the details raised questions and she reiterated the important issue is consent. She also noted that anything that occurred after the VC might have said no is not consensual. Moreover, she said, the duo had gone out as friends, despite Mack’s previous claims that he had not known the woman beforehand.
Thompson also pointed out that while the VC might have told Mack to put on a condom, this did not mean she had consented to have sex with him. Rather, the prosecutor asserted the woman had already been assaulted and probably feared for her life, thus using sex to prevent an even scarier situation.
The prosecutor also defended any inconsistencies in the VC’s original statement to the police and that given during her time on the stand. Thompson explained that the woman had been in a state of distress at the time she had given her statement in the police. She added that the VC had taken to the witness box and relived the ordeal.
On the abduction charge, Thompson told the court after the club, the VC asked Mack to take her home, only for the accused to tell her he would call a taxi when they arrived at his house. However, when the two arrived at Mack’s house, Thompson said the VC refused to get out of the car. It was then Mack allegedly dragged her by her hair and lifted her into the house.
