JEDDAH: The Department of Murder and Retribution at the Jeddah Criminal Court received the case of a 22-year-old citizen, who was accused of raping a woman in her home. According to case details, the prosecutor demanded the death penalty due to the inhumane nature of the crime.

Investigations revealed a citizen had lost his mobile phone and upon calling the number, a young man, the defendant, answered and told the owner he had found it. The owner requested that he deliver the mobile phone to his home. When the accused went to the home to do so, he found the wife of the phone's owner alone. He allegedly forcibly entered the house, locked the door from inside and raped her.

After the incident, the woman’s husband filed a report against the young man, who was arrested and transferred to the Bureau of Investigation and Prosecution. The man admitted to the charges, but denied entering the house by force, instead claiming the woman had lured him in.

Following extensive deliberations and a review of case details, a committee of three judges decided to dismiss the request of the prosecutor to issue the death sentence, and instead issued a six year jail sentence against the accused, starting from the date of his arrest.

The prosecutor general objected to the judicial decision, while the defendant’s lawyer, Tariq Al-Shabi, demanded that the punishment be reduced.

The defendant’s family had asked for a lawyer from the Committee of Public Defense Lawyers, which assigns volunteers to defend those who cannot afford to hire lawyers.

Al-Shabi argued that the defendant is a young man who made a criminal mistake he deeply regrets, and is on the verge of marriage and starting a new life, denying some of the claims put forward by the prosecution. The defense also argued that the owner of the mobile phone was negligent and irresponsible by suggesting that a stranger deliver the phone to his home, knowing his wife would be alone at the time and that he should have picked up the device himself.

The defense lawyer said he would provide the court with a list of objections to the ruling within the legal period.