This morning, the Judge of the Court of Justice heard the criminal case brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office against the man C. (63), accused of abusing his minor female family member.
It was understood that despite C. maintaining that he did nothing wrong, the Prosecutor finds him guilty and demanded a sentence of 30 months in prison. Defense attorney Mr. Zaandam maintains that there is no evidence.
ACCUSATION OF TOUCHING THE CHILD
The Prosecutor stated that C. is accused of attempting to have a relationship with the minor girl T. between October 21, 2022, and September 5, 2024.
The Prosecutor further stated that C. took the girl to a certain location, told her that he wanted to have sexual relations, and removed her clothes. The Prosecutor accuses C. of committing immoral acts with the minor T. by touching her intimate parts. C.’s family was present in the courtroom.
SUSPECT DENIES ALLEGATIONS
C. told the Judge that during the entire period mentioned, the minor T. was never in the car with him at any time. The Judge asked C. again whether T. was ever in his car. C. told the Judge that the girl was never in his car. The Judge pointed out to C. that T. declared she had been in his car. According to C., between late May 2024 and early July 2024, he drove T. to school at the request of T.’s parents. The Judge remarked that C. was thus admitting that T. had been in his car.
C. explained to the Judge that sometimes T. would take the bus with her friend. According to C., for 3 weeks in June 2024, he dropped T. off at school and continued on to his work in San Nicolas. The Judge asked if it could be said that T. rode with C. about 10 times, and C. agreed that yes. Notably, C. is the brother of T.’s mother.
The Judge asked C. how he would describe his relationship with T. According to C., T. trusted him with many things happening at school, including sexual relationships T. was having at school. These conversations took place when C. drove T. to school in the morning. According to C., he gave T. positive advice, telling her that she should not have relationships with all her male friends because it would give her a bad reputation.
TAKING THE CHILD TO A MOTEL / SHORT-STAY APARTMENT
At a certain point, an argument arose between them where C. told her that he could no longer keep picking her up like that because T.’s parents would think C. was doing things with T. C. told the Judge that one day T. texted him at 10:00 a.m. asking him to pick her up. C. told her he could only do so later, around 2:00 p.m. That day C. went to pick T. up around 2:00 p.m., but T. went with her father instead and told him that C. had wanted to abuse her.
C. admitted to taking T. to a short-stay apartment/motel. He told the Judge that he paid to go inside and showed T. the place. According to C., he did this because he advised T. not to have relations with men in public places or in the woods, but rather in apartments like that. According to C., he told T.’s father about this. C. insisted that nothing happened inside the apartment nor inside his car.
GIRL STATES UNCLE TOUCHED HER
The Judge stated that on September 5, 2024, T.’s father went to report C. to the police. The father told the police that near a church in Rooi Afo, C. allegedly tried to have sexual relations with his daughter, and that this allegedly happened 3 times.
The Judge continued, stating that T. (15) was interviewed by the police. The girl said that when C. drove her to school, C. would touch her and tell her things like wanting to have sexual relations with her. C. told the Judge that when T. rode with him, she was very closed off and upset. He denied touching the girl in the car.
GIVING AN IPHONE IN EXCHANGE FOR RELATIONS
The Judge further stated that T. declared to the police that C. gave her an iPhone and that T. was expected to pay with her body. C. told the Judge that this was not true, stating he simply gave her the cell phone as a gift. The Judge went on to point out that T. declared C. took her to a location to have relations with her. C. told the Judge that nothing ever happened. The Judge noted that T. expressed having a lot of anger in her mind due to all of this, which disrupted her at school. At one point, she confessed everything to a schoolteacher because her mind was confused.
The Judge showed C. several photographs of locations where, according to T., she was taken. C. told the Judge he did not recognize those places.
The Judge noted that police obtained chat messages between C. and the minor T., where C. allegedly told T. that if she had relations with young men, C. would like to have relations with her so she could see if older men were better compared to young boys. The Judge showed C. a chat with a photo of a couple in a relationship where C. told T. “Just Friends.” C. told the Judge he meant he would like to have a female friend like that, but not T. The Judge pointed out another chat where C. allegedly told T. that she could have a boyfriend, but T. would need to make time for C. The Judge remarked that this shows something very different from what C. claims, stating the chats suggest C. wanted an open relationship with T. C. insisted he wanted an open relationship with a woman, but not with T., who is his relative. The Judge continued questioning C., and at a certain point C. admitted that if T. were an adult, he would want to have a relationship with her. He told the Judge he did not want to harm T. and wanted her to have her own life.
The Judge stated that chats discussing sexual relations were retrieved from C.’s phone between C. and T. According to C., T. asked him, but that day never came. According to C., T. has issues and does everything to get her way. The Judge discussed C.’s personal circumstances, at which point C. began to cry because his wife suffers from advancing Alzheimer’s disease and her condition is deteriorating.
PROSECUTOR DEMANDS 30 MONTHS IN PRISON
The Prosecutor told the Judge that while T.’s statements are not entirely clear and consistent, it can be concluded that she was taken to school by her uncle C., received an iPhone from C., and was expected to pay through sexual relations. The Prosecutor noted they went to a short-stay apartment with the intention of having sexual relations, but T. refused. The Prosecutor added that T. recounted another situation where they again went to a short-stay apartment, where C. allegedly inserted his fingers into her private parts. At the time, the girl was 15 years old.
The Prosecutor believes there is supporting evidence, including chat messages between C. and T. showing that C. wanted to have sexual relations with T. The Prosecutor finds C. guilty of committing immoral acts with T.
Regarding sentencing, the Prosecutor stated that he took C.’s personal circumstances and the severity of the case into account, requesting 30 months in prison, 10 months of which suspended with a 3-year probation period.
DEFENSE ATTORNEY’S ARGUMENT
Defense attorney Mr. Zaandam argued that there is no legal evidence showing C. committed immoral acts with T. He stated that there is only the minor’s declaration and no supporting physical evidence. The attorney noted that T.’s parents themselves asked C. to drive T. to school, reiterating that evidence is insufficient. Regarding sentencing, the attorney asked the Judge to consider that C.’s wife suffers from advanced Alzheimer’s. He added that C. has a son living at home who has relapsed into addiction. Because C. is not earning an income, they risk losing their home as there is no one to pay household expenses or support the family. The attorney proposed a suspended sentence, a contact ban between C. and the parents, and community service.
At the end of the trial, C. tearfully told the Judge that he did nothing wrong. The Judge closed the case and announced that the verdict will be delivered on October 19, 2026.