bust Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Tripped’ and penetrated teen cleared of rape charges Ehsan Abdulaziz, a 46-year-old millionaire property developer who was charged with raping an 18-year old, was cleared in court after claiming that he accidentally “tripped and fell†into the teenager and accidentally penetrated her. The jury came to the decision after only 30 minutes of deliberation. The 18-year-old reported that she and a 24-year-old friend had been partying at a swanky London nightclub in August of 2014 when Abdulaziz invited the two over to his €1,000-per-night table, and then offered them a ride back to apartment, where he reportedly gave the two designer vodka. At some point, Abdulaziz took the 24-year-old into another room to have sex, leaving the 18-year-old to sleep off the drinking. However, she said she later awoke in the morning to find Abdulaziz on top of her and forcing himself inside of her. In court, Abdulaziz argued that he had simply gone to check on the girl to offer her a T-shirt to sleep in or a ride home, but she attempted to seduce him, pulling him on top of her and sticking his hand between her legs. But here’s the real kicker, folks: He said his penis must have been “poking out of his underwear†(and apparently hard) so that when he fell he “accidentally penetrated†her. As to why his semen and DNA were found inside the victim, he said it must have been on his hands from when he had sex with the 24-year-old. “I’m fragile,†Abdulaziz said in court. “I fell down, but nothing ever happened between me and this girl. Nothing ever happened.†Judge Martin Griffiths reportedly allowed Abdulaziz’ defense attorneys to present 20 minutes worth of evidence in private, which it seems is a thing you can do if you are a rich man. Seriously, what can’t you do if you’re a rich man? Besides rape someone, of course. If you’re rich and you rape someone, apparently they just call that being a klutz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Hi, This is a fucking disgrace and both he AND the judge should be sent to prison. He obviously didn't “accidentally penetrated†her and it is very likely the judge accepted a bribe to clear him. Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 This is in the UK! I expect better from the Brits!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coss Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Of course, not being on the Jury, we assume that the reportage´is the whole story. It may be that the Jury had other, information that cast doubts on the girl's story. I think it's likely it that the Jury, chucked the case out for other reasons, than the idiot's lame excuse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 Of course it helped being able to afford the services of a good lawyer. But i'm inclined to believe him to a point, just my first thought bar girls working freelance in an expensive nightclub, moving in high circles on the lookout to meet rich buffalo for sex and money. There is more to all of this ...Ummm .. I feel there are no innocents here, and everyone is as bad as each other in not telling the whole truth.What ever was said behind closed doors and why the jury dismissed the case no one will ever know, but it was enough to dismiss the case .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo_bill Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 London l not being Bangkok regarding the ways of finding justice at court it would be most informative to know the whole story including the " evidence in private " part of it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 After further research it appears in a British court of law, if something is heard in private. This actually means the court is cleared of all media and everyone in the public galleries. The judge, 12 members of the jury, defence and prosecution lawyers, and all court officials remain. To suggest all that remain could be bribed in a High Court in London, I really don't think so ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bust Posted December 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 After further research it appears in a British court of law, if something is heard in private. This actually means the court is cleared of all media and everyone in the public galleries. The judge, 12 members of the jury, defence and prosecution lawyers, and all court officials remain. To suggest all that remain could be bribed in a High Court in London, I really don't think so ... Well thanks for clearing that up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pasathai1 Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 tripped over his pekker ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coss Posted December 18, 2015 Report Share Posted December 18, 2015 On consideration, I reckon it's a case of disgruntled worker, vs idiot millionaire. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now