He was a Minicab driver, and got off at court.
She must have made the whole thing up then.
Minicab driver cleared of raping actor's sister
Tuesday, 28th February 2006, 15:49
Category: Crime and Punishment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - A minicab driver accused of raping the sister of a Hollywood movie star after she had been drinking heavily and taking drugs at a farewell party for her brother today walked free from court.
The woman downed sake, vodka and beer at celebrity club Bouji's in south Kensington, London, where she rubbed "white powder" into her gums.
It was alleged that after driving her home, Imran Farooque, 32, went into the flat because she didn't have the £20 to pay her share of the fare. Once inside he allegedly raped her.
Farooque always admitted having sex with her but claimed it was consensual. He even left a message on her mobile phone saying he thought her behaviour had been inappropriate. He was arrested when he turned up on her doorstep a few hours later to collect the money owed.
But today when she gave evidence the woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, told Snaresbrook Crown Court she could remember very little of what had happened and admitted she was "out of it.".
Asking the jury to return a not guilty verdict Judge William Kennedy praised the victim for the honesty of her evidence which "shone like a beacon through her testimony."
Addressing the jurors Judge Kennedy said: "Before he could have been convicted you would have to have been certain on three points. Firstly that he had sexual intercourse with her, secondly, that she had not consented to intercourse and thirdly that he did not reasonably believe that she had consented.
"In this case it has always been agreed that sexual intercourse took place, so the first question is answered. In relation to the second point she told you that there are no circumstances in which she would have agreed to intercourse with the defendant and the defendant himself said that what happened between them was inappropriate.
"It is in relation to the third requirement that the difficulty has always been, that he believed at the time of intercourse that she consented. Our law doesn't require him to prove that. It is the prosecution that needs to make you sure on the evidence that she didn't consent.
"The difficulty in this case arises out of the honesty of her testimony. She can recall so little about what had occurred and had no recollection about what was said by whom to whom at any stage.
"That is fatal to the prosecutions case because they simply couldn't describe the circumstances in which intercourse took place or the order in which the events occured. There are so many question unanswered.
"Without trespassing on what would be your (the jury's) area I have absolutely no doubt about her absolute determination to be honest - that shone like a beacon through her testimony. It would have been easy to guess or embroider but she did no such thing and was scrupulously fair, but it is that very fairness that means this case cannot conceivably result in conviction."
To protect her from cross-examination, Judge Kennedy asked the jury to acquit Faroooque, saying to continue the trial "would cause her evident and enormous distress."
Farooque, of Mitcham, south London, denied one count of rape on July 30 last year
Login
Register
FAQ
