Overview of the case (facts) :
Our client was sued by the complainant, who was an employee of the company he ran, alleging that she was subjected to a series of quasi-rapes and assaults over a long period of time.
The complainant alleged that the client had sexually abused and assaulted her on numerous occasions in his office, but in reality, the complainant had personal problems, including embezzling company funds and using debentures, and made the false accusation to cover up her own misconduct and gain unjust enrichment from the client.
The client was in such an unjust situation that he came to us to find out the truth.
Case Issues (Case Characteristics) :
The key issue in this case was the credibility of the complainant's testimony: in the face of a severe lack of objective evidence, it was important to uncover the inconsistencies and holes in the complainant's one-sided allegations and prove that the complainant had an ulterior motive.
Assistance from a warm river :
Through in-depth consultations with the client, our lawyers understood the substance of the case and provided close legal representation, including
Impeaching the credibility of the accuser's statements: We actively impeached the credibility of the accuser's statements by analyzing how they changed over time, how they stood up to objective scrutiny, and how they didn't make sense to common sense. In particular, we looked for specific inconsistencies in the accuser's claims about when, where, and how the alleged harm occurred.
Lack of objective evidence and rebuttal of DNA evidence: The case emphasized that there was little direct evidence other than the complainant's testimony. As for the only DNA evidence submitted by the complainant (a wipe), we challenged its admissibility by arguing that our client had a history of disposing of hygiene products in the trash after personal use (masturbation) in the representative's office due to his usual urinary incontinence, and raised a reasonable doubt that the wipe could have come from that process. We also raised the issue of whether the evidence was lawfully collected, which focused on undermining its reliability.
Strongly argued the complainant's innocent motive: We provided specific evidence of the complainant's embezzlement of company funds, use of private debentures, and even personal information of fellow employees, and strongly argued that the complainant likely made the false accusations intentionally to avoid his own criminal liability and to obtain a settlement from our client, which further discredited the complainant's statements.
Affirmative Defense to Assault Allegations: We refuted the assault allegations by carefully analyzing the actual presence of the alleged assault weapon (quote) and the circumstances of the incident. We secured statements from witnesses who were present at the scene, clarifying that our client's actions did not rise above the level of a professional reprimand as a supervisor.
Active communication and input during the investigation: Mr. Ongang accompanied his client during the investigation from the very beginning to ensure that his client was psychologically stable and able to make coherent statements, and submitted several defense briefs to the investigating authorities, actively expressing his client's innocence and doing his best to ensure that the substantive truth of the case was revealed.
■ Results :
After careful consideration of the evidence presented and our diligent defense, the prosecutor dismissed all of our client's charges of rape and assault with prejudice (insufficient evidence), freeing him from the false accusations and allowing him to get back to his life.
Case outcome materials
