Judge Won’t Rule Rape in Marriage Under Bahamian Law – Eye Witness News

Nassau, Bahamas — A Supreme Court judge has ruled that a husband’s repeated “coercion” of his wife was cruel, but that rape does not exist in marriage under Bahamian law.

In a ruling handed down on Monday, Judge Dennis Lewis Johnson granted a divorce to a woman who “for a long time” felt like a rape victim.

Lewis-Johnson, however, said the use of the word rape, along with the issues raised by parties to non-consensual forced sexual intercourse, required the court to consider the term in the context of Bahamian marriage law.

“Courts have recognized rape as the most heinous atrocity and malicious violation of a person,” she said.

“But strictly reading Bahamian law, there is no rape in marriage. Pursuant to Section 3 of the Sex Offenses Act, the law does not allow one spouse to rape the other. , interpret and apply existing laws.We cannot and must not give in to the temptation to change the law.”

The woman filed for divorce in June 2021, citing brutality. She reportedly left the marital home in early July 2021. The couple married in 2005 and share a son.

Her evidence was that she had suffered emotional and psychological abuse during their marriage.

“The last time defendant climbed over petitioner was April 18, 2021, and the next morning petitioner suffered a meltdown at work,” the ruling read.

“Complainant said the events that occurred on April 18, 2021 felt like an out-of-body experience. She said intercourse with respondents had become a chore and lacked intimacy.

“The petitioner claimed that the defendant would go home, anoint with pleasure, and leave. Each time she had to find a way to distract herself.”

The woman claimed that it was the norm for her husband to come home and ask for sex. , used the computer, and slept.

The woman claimed that her husband’s behavior and treatment towards her significantly impaired her physical, emotional, and mental health, leading to her diagnosis of high blood pressure.

However, the evidence of the husband is that from the beginning of the marriage the wife did not meet his sexual needs due to work commitments, did not attend church regularly, and refused to attend marriage counseling with him. was being treated cruelly.

He claimed that he did not participate in domestic adultery, did not drink, smoke, or use obscene language towards his wife. He also paid her household bills and helped her get back to health after two major surgeries with her “patience, love, care and attention.”

The husband further claimed that he always supported her projects financially and was always her go-to person.

“He said he often comes home dirty, so he often helps clean the house,” the ruling read.

“The clothes previously washed by the defendant were not folded and the bed was covered with the work of the complainant. was doing well,” he claimed.. He said in his main piece of evidence that as a husband he had the right to ask him to clean the house. Defendant also recalled when Petitioner’s wedding ring lay on the floor of her vestibule and the dog was licking it, but Petitioner did not seem to mind. “

According to the judge, it was clear from his evidence that the husband lacked concern and did not understand how his actions affected his wife.

“The court accepts his evidence that he meets the family’s financial needs, loyalty, loyalty and commitment. However, given the evidence as a whole, the defendant is found to be cruel to the petitioner. ” Louis Johnson ruled.

“Despite defendant’s belief that his actions were his right in marriage, I find how he exercised that right. Petitioner and Feeling Violated – Marriage Cause Law It meets the criteria for cruelty under Article 16(1).”