Relevant Legal Provisions

Article 225, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code: Anyone who engages in intercourse with a man or woman by exploiting their mental or physical disabilities, intellectual deficiencies, or similar conditions rendering them incapable of or unaware of resistance shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than three years and not more than ten years.

Article 225, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code: Anyone who commits indecent acts against a man or woman by exploiting their mental or physical disabilities, intellectual deficiencies, or similar conditions rendering them incapable of or unaware of resistance shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than six months and not more than five years.

Facts and Reasons

The defendant (our client) and the complainant became acquainted through a social media platform and arranged to meet. Later, due to the complainant's low mood, they agreed to meet again at a cinema. On the day of the meeting, the defendant confessed their feelings and kissed the complainant, then inserted a finger into the complainant’s body. However, after the complainant expressed refusal, the defendant immediately withdrew their hand. Subsequently, the complainant, who was already diagnosed with schizophrenia and depression, accused the defendant of taking advantage of the situation to commit sexual intercourse.

Prosecutor's Disposition

The investigation into the defendant's case regarding obstruction of sexual autonomy has concluded, and it has been decided not to prosecute.

The defendant denied the allegations, claiming they did not perceive any unwillingness or resistance from the complainant during the events described. The complainant appeared emotionally stable that day and did not express feeling unwell. While the complainant had mentioned having depression during their interactions, the defendant noted that many people claim to have depression due to modern life stress and that the complainant appeared mentally stable throughout their interactions. After watching the movie, the complainant suggested having dinner together, and both parties hugged briefly at the MRT station upon parting, without any coercion.

Apart from the complainant's sole testimony and their possession of a disability handbook and a medical certificate, there was no other substantive evidence proving the defendant used violence, threats, or any unwilling means, or exploited the complainant’s inability to resist to engage in intercourse or indecency. The defendant’s statements are deemed credible. Furthermore, no additional evidence corroborates the complainant’s allegations or supports the accusations of criminal conduct as outlined in the complaint and report. The suspicion of the defendant’s alleged crime is insufficient.

(Some details of the case have been adjusted or omitted to protect the parties' rights.)