Corker v R

• Jurisdiction: Saint Kitts and Nevis
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
• Judge: Lewis, C.J.,Lewis, J.A.,Gordon, J.A.
• Judgment Date: 16 June 1967
• Neutral Citation: KN 1967 CA 1
• Docket Number: No. 2 of 1967
• Date: 16 June 1967

The West Indies Associated States Supreme Court. Court of Appeal

Lewis, C.J.,

Lewis, J.A.

Gordon, J.A.

No. 2 of 1967

Corker

and

R.

Criminal law - Rape — Appeal against conviction.

Facts: The appellant was convicted of rape. On appeal he argued that there was not enough evidence to support the finding of trial judge that sexual inter course with the appellant was involuntary.

Held: Appeal dismissed. There was ample evidence to support the judge's findings.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:

1 The appellant was convicted on the 23rd January 1967, of the offence of rape and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with hard labour. He now appeals against his conviction. The facts are fairly simple. The prosecutrix, a young girl named Joycelyn Williams, said that on the evening of the 30th October 1966, she went to the appellant's studio and he took photographs of her. She was to return on the afternoon of 3rd November, which she did, in order to see the photographs being developed. According to her story when she went the photographs had not yet been developed. The appellant went and called one Carlos who was to develop them. Carlos went into the dark room and she went along with him and the door was closed. After a certain period of time the appellant came into the room. Carlos made a remark to him and left. Then the appellant, after certain introductory remarks, told the complainant that she wouldn't have any money to pay him for the machine, which Carlos had been operating and that she would have to do something for it. He suggested to her that he would be intimate with her in three different ways. She did not agree. He assaulted her, putting his hand under her skirt and his finger into her vagina and eventually, after some wrestling he succeeded in removing her blouse, the hook of her brassiere got broken during the course of the struggle and her panties were taken off. The appellant, according to her story, took off his trousers and underpants, threatened her with a tripod, wrestled with her and threw her to the floor, then got upon her and had sexual intercourse with her. This went on for some period of time after which there was some noise outside the door. The appellant got up. A man named Patchmore came into the room while she was nude and shook her hand. Then the appellant came back into the room and she said he told her to sign her name to a paper. On that paper was written, “I came to Mr. Coker's Studio and he did me nothing at all”. This was her account of what was written on the paper she signed. The appellant was apparently not satisfied with that and he brought another piece of paper for her to sign and told her to sign her name on a blank sheet of paper, which she did. She signed her Christian name “Joycelyn” and he told her to sign her name in full and he made her sign her name again a little further down on the paper: “Joycelyn Williams”. He put the paper into his pocket. Afterwards he gave her her clothes and after some time he gave her the pictures and she left. She didn't go directly home but she went by another route where she met a girlfriend of hers called Rosemary Martin and to her she made a report of what she alleged the appellant had done to her. Then she went home and it was by that time something after ten o'clock. At that time she didn't speak to her parents or other relatives, but early next morning she made a report to her sister. Her sister in turn reported to her mother, who took her to the police.

2 The police took her to Doctor Jong who examined her and took vaginal specimens and later that day the police eventually got from her the blouse and brassiere. According to the complainant's story two buttons had come off her blouse during the course of the struggle. The brassiere, from which the hook at the back had been burst, and the blouse with the missing buttons, were produced in evidence at the trial. After she had been examined by the doctor the police took her to the appellant's studio and there they found a tripod, which the complainant had said had been used by the appellant to intimidate her on the afternoon of the 3rd November. They also found some razor blades, which the complainant had said were part of the equipment, which the appellant had threatened to use upon her in the course of his sexual exercise....