The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition)
Civil rape case evidence ‘persuasive’
The evidence of a woman who brought a civil case against a man cleared of raping her is “compelling and persuasive”, a court has been told.
Her lawyer said the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has “suffered severe and long-lasting effects” from the alleged sexual assault and he asked a sheriff to find Stephen Coxen liable.
Coxen’s QC, however, said the 23-year-old man had given a clear and robust defence of his position and has always maintained he did not rape the woman.
The defence counsel urged the court to reject the claim.
Coxen, of Bury in Lancashire, is being sued by the woman, also 23, who accuses him of raping her in St Andrews, Fife, after a Friday night out in September 2013.
Coxen denied the charges and in November 2015 a jury acquitted him on a not-proven verdict.
His alleged victim, known as the pursuer in the case, raised a civil action at the Personal Injury Court in Edinburgh, which has been heard over the last two weeks.
In his closing submissions, Simon Di Rollo QC, representing the woman, argued her case should succeed, saying her evidence was “careful and precise” .
The court heard the woman alleges she was sexually assaulted by Coxen in her flat, while he maintains intercourse happened with her consent.
“The accounts given by the pursuer on the one hand and by the defender on the other are sharply different,” said Mr Di Rollo.
The QC pointed to aspects of the case to back his assertion that “her evidence is cogent, compelling and persuasive”.
He highlighted evidence she has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), that she was prescribed a series of medication; that she moved flats, was described as a “changed person” by her friend and her studies were “severely disrupted”.
Mr Di Rollo also referred to an injury to the woman’s tongue, her degree of “intoxication” and Coxen’s “lack of an alternative credible explanation”.
“In my submission to the court, she is a credible and reliable witness,” he said.
“She has suffered severe and longlasting effects of these events.”
Stephen O’Rourke QC – representing Coxen, who contests the action – urged the sheriff to grant a decree of absolvitor, a legal term meaning a claim is rejected.
He did not contest she had developed PTSD but said the diagnosis is “largely reliant on the pursuer’s account”.
The QC suggested the woman had overstated the amount of alcohol she had consumed that night and said the case was “in the territory of loss of inhibition rather than lack of capacity”.
Mr O’Rourke told the court: “The defender gave a clear and robust defence in this matter. He has always maintained that he did not rape the pursuer.”
Sheriff Robert Weir QC will issue his decision in the case at a later date.