This morning the judge issued a verdict in the criminal case that the Public Prosecutor initiated against the Colombian man C. (55). Although the prosecutor considered C. guilty, the judge had doubts.
It was understood that the prosecutor demanded 3 years in prison for C., whom the prosecutor considered guilty of having raped woman H. on March 14, 2024. The judge said he doubted whether C. actually raped H., taking into account, among other things, that they had already had a romantic relationship for some time.
THE ALLEGED RAPE
During the handling of the case on January 12, 2026, C. told the judge that he knew woman H., who had come from the Netherlands in November–December 2023. H. stayed in an apartment near C. According to C., they had known each other for some time and had a romantic relationship. The judge noted that H. had told the police that they had had sexual relations even before March 14, 2024.
C. said that on March 14 he had a birthday and they planned to go out. H. arrived late and C. prepared a rum and coke. Then they went to eat and drank some alcohol. After that they returned home. According to C., at home he gave H. a massage and H. fell asleep on the massage bed. The judge said that H. had stated that it was C. who removed her clothes and gave her a massage.
According to C., he did not force or rape her. He told the judge that at one point he wanted to have sex, but H. stood up and said no and went to her bedroom. C. said he did nothing. H. went to the bedroom and C. stayed in the living room. A few days later, H. packed all her things and left the house.
The judge said that what C. explained largely matched what H. had told the police. The judge pointed out that H. said that when she told C. “no,” he continued and had sex with her anyway. H. stated that she kept saying she did not want to, and then C. stopped. C. told the judge that a few days later H. told him that on March 14, 2024 she had had a flashback of something that had happened in the past with another man who had had sex with her against her will.
The judge said that the central question was whether C. forced H. to have sex. It was only in April 2024 that H. filed a report, at a time when C. was trying to contact her to fix their relationship.
PROSECUTOR DEMANDS 3 YEARS IN PRISON
The prosecutor told the judge that he believed H.’s statement matched what she had told her friends. H. said she had had a sexual relationship with C. but wanted to stop it and remain friends. On March 14, 2024, despite H. telling C. to stop, he continued. When H. started crying, C. stopped.
The prosecutor said H.’s friends stated that H. told them she had been raped and was very emotional. The prosecutor believed there was supporting evidence and said that C.’s statement actually confirmed what happened. Three days after the incident, H. left C.’s house. The prosecutor demanded 3 years in prison.
DEFENSE: NO EVIDENCE OF RAPE
Defense attorney Mr. Illes told the judge that there was no evidence of rape. Only H.’s statement existed. He argued that emotions should not influence justice to convict a suspect, because emotions are a personal reaction, not proof.
The lawyer said there were doubts in H.’s statement. He pointed out that C. and H. had a relationship and lived together in C.’s house. In his opinion, H. herself removed her clothes and lay down on the massage bed. There was no force and no penetration.
When C. wanted to have sex, H. said no and C. stopped immediately. The lawyer also pointed out that H. continued to visit C. at his workplace, which raises the question: if she was truly raped, why would she keep going to where C. worked?
He argued that H.’s statement was doubtful. He emphasized that C. was open and did not hide anything. He admitted that he wanted to have sex but stopped when H. said no. The lawyer maintained that there was no supporting evidence and that C. should be declared free. He said there was serious doubt about what actually happened.
JUDGE DECLARES THE MAN FREE
The judge said that an accusation of rape is very serious. In such cases there are always two people: the suspect and the alleged victim. The judge emphasized that the law does not allow a conviction based solely on the victim’s statement; there must be supporting evidence, and that evidence must be convincing.
In the judge’s view, what stood out in this case was that both C. and H. had a prior relationship. H. lived near C. and they had had consensual sex before. On the day of the incident, H. fell asleep on the massage bed and C. was touching her. H. said there was sexual contact against her will.
The judge concluded that it was impossible to determine exactly what happened. It could not be proven that C. had sex with H. against her will. There was evidence that H. was emotional, but that could have been due to other issues, not necessarily the sexual encounter itself.
The judge said that in this case he could not make a clear choice and that he had reasonable doubt. Therefore, he declared C. free. It was observed that C.’s eyes filled with tears of joy.