Text vs. testimony?

Both the defense and prosecution attorneys made their closing statements before the jury in the rape trial of a former law clerk accused of rape yesterday at the NMI Superior Court in Susupe.

Closing statements made were a fire of text versus testimony, with the prosecution focusing on testimony of the alleged victim and witnesses and the defense demonstrating that the text messages between the alleged victim and her alleged rapist, William Abraczinkas, didn’t match with testimony she gave in court, adding that when observed, both time-wise, and regarding the trauma the alleged victim expressed she endured, the text didn’t match the testimony.

Defense attorney Charlene Brown took the lead for the defense, “this case is about humiliation, it is about resentment, and it is about retaliation. Will (Abraczinkas) only wanted to be friends with [the alleged victim]. You do not see him sending her texts where he is ‘kissy facing’ her. [The alleged victim] does. [She] wants more. And after April 16, she realizes there won’t be.”

During her rebuttal, assistant attorney general Frances Demapan said, “This is not the ‘Emoji Trial.’ We are not going to decide a sexual assault case, based on how a 50-year-old woman decides to use a kissy face and a laughing face emoji. The defense wants you to focus on what the victim did or didn’t do. But the victim is not the one on trial here. This is a consent trial. This is a trial of a woman who tried to stop a friend, a co-worker, from raping her by pleading and crying, ‘No! Stop! Please, William, don’t do this.’ And let’s be clear about the use of this term, violent rape, in this case. A violent rape does not mean it must result in physical injuries. A rape is violent because it is against the victim’s free will.”

Day 4 of the trial concluded with no verdict reached by the jury. Jury deliberations continue early this morning, but it is unclear how long it will be until a verdict is reached.