Dear Editor,
I refer to the SN letter `Headline on 11-year-old girl was abhorrent’ on January 1, 2021.
Thankfully, Ms. Yolande Gittens is no longer in the media or she would have used “rape” in the headline and that might have been construed by others as, in her words, being the “hallmark of the sensational style tabloids, whose primary interest, driven by pecuniary considerations catapult them to engage in salacious headlines in a bid to attract readership”.
None of us knows what the autopsy found beyond that which was stated in the Guyana Police Force release.
The Guyana Police Force ought to have been clearer on whether the results of the autopsy state whether there was sexual penetration as that would constitute rape or whether there were other forms of sexual activity as that would amount to being “sexually active”.
Possibly, the Pathologist found evidence of sexual activity but could not determine whether it was due to masturbation which is also provided for under the Sexual Offences Act and constitutes “sexual activity with a child by abusing a position of trust.”
I, nevertheless, thank her for the opportunity to inform her that her emotive use of the word “rape” is erroneous without all of the available information.
To do otherwise would be unethical and the fabrication of evidence before it becomes available.
Rather, “sexually abused” would be the most acceptable form until evidence is provided and charges are laid to capture those offences under the law.
Yours faithfully,
Denis Chabrol
Demerara Waves
