• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Daughter’s dream allowed in rape conviction of father!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Memory experts tell court dream enabled 22-year-old woman to recall father’s abuse 12 years earlier.


In an extensive judgment spanning some 174 pages, the Tel Aviv District Court confirmed on Thursday the guilty verdict of a man convicted of raping his daughter when she was 10.

Judges Zvi Gurfinkel, Judith Amsterdam and Dr. Kobi Vardi unanimously accepted expert testimony regarding the complainant, who said she repressed memories of the abuse and recalled it only years later in a terrifying dream.

The defendant, Benny Samuel, had first been convicted of raping his daughter in 2008 and was sentenced to 12 years in prison.

Following his conviction, Samuel appealed to the Supreme Court and his defense attorneys questioned the authenticity of the complainant’s memory of the abuse.

The complainant was 22- years old and living in New York when she had a dream that prompted her to recall the abuse. Four years passed before she summoned the courage to return to Israel and submit a police complaint about her father.

Following the recommendation of the Supreme Court, the parties agreed to return the case to the Tel Aviv District Court and both prosecution and defense submitted testimony from expert witnesses.

Witnesses for the defense filed opinions that the complainant’s memory was false, but the court ruled that this was not enough to create reasonable doubt about Samuel’s guilt.

Instead, judges accepted the testimony of prosecution witnesses Prof. Eli Zomer, Dr. Zvia Zeligman and Dr. Anat Gur, all experts in dealing with sexual assault victims.

In over a hundred pages of testimony, the expert witnesses said that the complainant’s dream was inspired by real memories, and pointed to the fact that she had experienced similar nightmares previously and had told her cousin that she felt her father had “done something to her.”

The complainant had also expressed discomfort about her relationship with her father and felt disgusted by him, they noted.

. . .

In confirming the original guilty verdict, the panel of judges also upheld the original sentence of 12 years in prison and a fine of NIS 228,000.

(Daughter?s dream allowed in rape conviction)
 
In a different court the ruling can be totally different. It depends so much on circumstantial evidence and lack of direct evidence of DNA.

On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out.
It also depends on how good a defense lawyer was hired by the accused.
Judicial system in every country is full of innocent people wrongly convicted serving term.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top