Supreme Court
VERDICT
1. Mr Iamak is charged with one count of sexual intercourse without consent.
2. The sole issue in this case is of consent. That is an issue of the facts.
3. The Prosecution bears the burden of proof and to the standard of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt. As Spear J stated in PP v Elman [2011] VUSC 75 at para 3:
This charge of sexual intercourse without consent requires proof beyond doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt simply means that the court is left sure of guilt. It does not require proof to an absolute certainty. It simply requires the court to be brought to the point where a reasonable doubt does not exist.
4. Having heard the evidence in this case, I am not satisfied that the Prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no consent.
5. As I am left with a doubt as to the issue of consent, I find Mr Iamak not guilty. He shall be deemed to be innocent of the charge and is acquitted.
DATED at Isangel, Tanna this 17th day of December 2019
BY THE COURT
………………………………………….
V.M. Trief
Judge