Two guilty of rape at Keetmanshoop

TWO Keetmanshoop residents who were accused of raping a woman after an all-night drinking session in early 2005 were found guilty in the High Court in Windhoek on charges of rape and attempted rape on Friday.

The trial of Johannes Alex Roos (30) and Immanuel Claasen (33) started before Judge Kato van Niekerk in August during a circuit court session of the High Court at Keetmanshoop. Both accused men pleaded not guilty.They were accused of having jointly attacked a woman at Keetmanshoop around midday on February 5 2005.Roos, Claasen and the woman had spent the preceding night in each other’s company, socialising and drinking.According to the woman she was attacked while walking with the two men to another spot at the town.She told the court that Roos raped her and that Claasen tried to do the same before her screaming attracted the attention of nearby security guards and the two men ran away from the scene.When the guards came to her rescue, they found her partly undressed, wearing only a top and panties, while Claasen ran away with the rest of her clothes, the Judge heard during the trial.Roos did not testify in his own defence after the prosecution had closed its case in the trial.Claasen however testified in his and Roos’s defence.He told the Judge that while he, Roos and the woman were walking together after their all-nighter, Roos and the woman paired off to a spot under a tree where they proceeded to have sex.After that, though, he saw the woman having a loud fight with Roos, he claimed.During the fight, the swearing woman refused to put her clothes on again, and he eventually picked it up, Claasen testified.Out of fright he ran off with Roos when they saw security guards approaching them, he said.Claasen denied that he had tried to rape the woman, and claimed that Roos and the woman had consensual sex.In her judgement, Judge Van Niekerk commented that she agreed with State advocate Ed Marondedze that only Roos could have countered the woman’s direct and repeated evidence that Roos had sex with her without her consent.Although the woman admitted to the court that she was suffering from an illness that was affecting her memory, and in spite of criticism against her evidence, she made a good impression on the court, Judge Van Niekerk said.Claasen’s evidence, however, was far-fetched and in her opinion not true, the Judge added.In her view, his behaviour after the rape that had been carried out by Roos was consistent with an intention on his part to also rape the woman, she said.The two men are scheduled to return to court on Friday for the hearing of evidence and arguments on the sentence that has to be imposed on them.They remain in custody in the meantime.Defence counsel Winnie Christians is representing Roos and Claasen.Both accused men pleaded not guilty.They were accused of having jointly attacked a woman at Keetmanshoop around midday on February 5 2005.Roos, Claasen and the woman had spent the preceding night in each other’s company, socialising and drinking.According to the woman she was attacked while walking with the two men to another spot at the town.She told the court that Roos raped her and that Claasen tried to do the same before her screaming attracted the attention of nearby security guards and the two men ran away from the scene.When the guards came to her rescue, they found her partly undressed, wearing only a top and panties, while Claasen ran away with the rest of her clothes, the Judge heard during the trial.Roos did not testify in his own defence after the prosecution had closed its case in the trial.Claasen however testified in his and Roos’s defence.He told the Judge that while he, Roos and the woman were walking together after their all-nighter, Roos and the woman paired off to a spot under a tree where they proceeded to have sex.After that, though, he saw the woman having a loud fight with Roos, he claimed.During the fight, the swearing woman refused to put her clothes on again, and he eventually picked it up, Claasen testified.Out of fright he ran off with Roos when they saw security guards approaching them, he said.Claasen denied that he had tried to rape the woman, and claimed that Roos and the woman had consensual sex.In her judgement, Judge Van Niekerk commented that she agreed with State advocate Ed Marondedze that only Roos could have countered the woman’s direct and repeated evidence that Roos had sex with her without her consent.Although the woman admitted to the court that she was suffering from an illness that was affecting her memory, and in spite of criticism against her evidence, she made a good impression on the court, Judge Van Niekerk said.Claasen’s evidence, however, was far-fetched and in her opinion not true, the Judge added.In her view, his behaviour after the rape that had been carried out by Roos was consistent with an intention on his part to also rape the woman, she said.The two men are scheduled to return to court on Friday for the hearing of evidence and arguments on the sentence that has to be imposed on them.They remain in custody in the meantime.Defence counsel Winnie Christians is representing Roos and Claasen.