Lisa Wilding KC, defending Mr Matturie, suggested what happened between them was, “consensual, willing and enthusiastic” sex, not rape, Chester Crown Court heard.
The woman denied this, claiming the incident left her feeling “shamed and disgusted”.
Ms Wilding continued: “When you and he had sex … you and he filmed that sex. You know that you and he had a discussion beforehand, words to the effect, ‘Let’s make our own little movie’.”
The witness replied: “No. I wouldn’t do that.”
Ms Wilding added: “He had his phone right in front of you all the time you and he was having sex.”
The woman replied: “I was not aware of that.”
Ms Wilding said: “You looked directly at the camera more than once, enjoying what you were doing?”
The woman, who became tearful, replied: “No.”
Ms Wilding continued: “The sex took nearly 20 minutes. You had sex initially on your knees. You then gave him oral sex, looking at the camera.
“Did you then sit on top of him, gyrating and smiling at the camera?”
“No,” the woman replied.
Miss Wilding said: “Well, then I’m going to have to ask you to look at some images.”
Jurors directed to enter not guilty verdicts
The hearing was then adjourned and when court resumed after lunch time, Timothy Cray QC, prosecuting, told the court the prosecution was not now seeking guilty verdicts on alleged sexual offences involving the 19-year-old complainant.
We must, of course, always but always believe the complainant in rape cases.
‘Ms Wilding added: “He had his phone right in front of you all the time you and he was having sex.”’
Any pay increase for Barristers should be conditional on improving their grammar.
Has the women been charged with perjury and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice?
I worry that by the end we had a QC on duty; has there been some sort of tragic accident putting Charlotte on the throne?
Sure, she’s entitled to her opinion, may even have view this (Meghan Markle style) as “Her Truth”, but equally the court is entitled to view the facts dispassionately and decide that she’s somewhere between a liar and a delusional narcissist.
Once again, taxpayers money being spunked against the wall with a highly paid KC asking questions that should have been asked by the interviewing cops or the CPS prior to charges being dismissed. If this is the CPS approach to try and get the rape conviction rates up then they are on a hiding to nothing. As happened under the Alison Saunders regime we’ll just waste more money on pointless prosecutions that clearly fail the most basic criteria for trial (“Likelihood of a successful prosecution”)
Can he recoup his legal costs by selling the sex video? Seems fair enough to me.
Interesting hypothetical: If you bring a private prosecution against an official of the CPS for misconduct in public office, can the CPS take over the prosecution and then drop it?
No idea if this is the CPS going for a “never mind the quality, feel the width” (oo err) strategy, but:
Mr Mendy, 28, is accused of seven counts of rape against four women; one count of attempted rape; and one count of sexual assault.
That’s a lot of raping to be accused of.
How do these prosecutions ever make it to court when the defence has evidence of this quality? Don’t they use it to try to persuade the prosecutors to drop it?
Over the pond Deshaun Watson, a talented American football player with a $250 million contract, has encountered certain difficulties due to his allegedly insatiable appetite for massages with happy endings.
However Mr Watson or his associates appear to have splashed the cash (no I’m not going there) so that 97% of the ladies no longer wish to go to court.
Either his name should have been kept anonymous or hers should have been revealed.
Got a post on this one coming up – how did the CPS proceed with it? Did they not know about the video?
Did they know, but think that it wouldn’t come up from the defence?
Julia, IANAL, but I think they must have known, or it wouldn’t have been admissible in court. Exchange of evidence and all that.
“How do these prosecutions ever make it to court when the defence has evidence of this quality? Don’t they use it to try to persuade the prosecutors to drop it?”
Because I’m prepared to bet that his phone was confiscated in short order, the CPS denied they had anything useful and it was only returned to the defence team 20 mins before they went into court. Read the Secret Barrister’s books for this sort of anecdote.
‘Either his name should have been kept anonymous or hers should have been revealed’
Must admit I agree with you.
“Judge Stephen Everett warned jurors not to speculate as to why the prosecution had decided not to pursue guilty verdicts in relation to the charges concerned”
No, they won’t “speculate” because they won’t bloody we’ll need to.
They probably will “speculate” though when they come to considering the other accusers. Judge Everett probably believes he can instruct them them not to do so, but then he probably believes judges can instruct the tide not to come in.