Port Louis — Last year, four youths were arrested for the rape of 49-year old Florise Sirop. They say that they were tortured into confessing a crime they have not committed.

Many readers will remember the shocking story of Florise Theodore (née Sirop) who, in the early hours of June 1, 2009, arrived at Quatre Bornes police station with her clothes in tatters alleging that she'd been raped by a gang of youths. The motive cited for this unspeakable act was vengeance. Indeed, the protagonists purportedly had it in for Florise Sirop's son, Marcus, after the latter had apparently manhandled one of their sisters. Unable to locate Marcus, they reportedly took their rage out on his mother. Later that day, the police arrested ten individuals in connection with the crime, five of whom were minors.

Fast forward 13 months to the present. Three of the accused - Géraldo Reine de Carthage, 18, Govinda Carpenen, 22, and Vicky Sookloll, 18 - have pleaded not guilty to the rape of Florise Sirop. They are currently contesting the admissibility of the statements they gave to the police on the morning of June 1, 2009, in the Assizes Court. They aver that their statements were beaten out of them. A "voir dire" proceeding (according to Wikipedia, "a hearing to determine the admissibility of evidence"), which commenced on July 20, is examining whether or not these statements are worthy of admission.

Given that the statements form the crux of the case against them and that they could end up spending more than 20 years in prison if found guilty, it's safe to say that the stakes are passably high for the three young men. "These allegations of torture mean that there are some very serious human rights issues involved here. The issue here is whether or not they were tortured," remarks one of their lawyers, Jean Claude Bibi. The defence believes that its case is reinforced by the fact that the statements of the different accused parties are "almost identical".

Before going further into the details, however, it'd perhaps be useful to try to make sense of the somewhat muddled sequence of events that led to the arrest of the youths. According to diary book extracts, Florise Sirop first appeared at the Quatre Bornes police station at 04h22 on the morning of June 1, 2009, seeking police assistance because a group of youths were "trying to assault her sister-in-law and they were armed with 'sabers'.". She did not mention that she had been raped, which, according to the timeline, was supposed to have happened three hours earlier.

Later that morning, at 07h11 to be precise, she returned to the station affirming that several youths had raped her and beat up her partner, Philippe Albert, at 01h30 on June 1. The latter also gave a statement to the Quatre-Bornes police at around 08h20 (whereas the police said they had brought him in to the station well after 09h00) in which he declared that his partner's rape and his thrashing had in fact occurred at 20h30 the night before (May 31). One week later, Philippe Albert made another statement in which he claimed that the tragedy had actually unfolded at 04h00 on the morning of June 1, 2009. Confused yet? You're probably not alone.

Suspects were rounded up later that day (accounts of how the police went about identifying them vary). In the Assizes court on Tuesday, Géraldo Reine de Carthage recounted how he was pulled out of bed in his sister's two-bedroom house at Cité Bassin, Quatre Bornes, on the morning of June 1 before being taken to the NHDC of Palma to get his friends. They then proceeded to the police station where, he alleges, he was beaten by four policemen with pipes and clubs. In its cross-examination, the prosecution enquired as to why the medical exam conducted the next day came up with no trace of violence. The accused claimed that the doctor had only spent a few minutes examining him and had only looked at his genitals.

The Principal State Counsel, Me Johanne Moutou-Leckning also questioned him on the absence of any complaint of police brutality in the provisional charge retained against him. "Are you trying to tell the court that the doctor, magistrate and police all made mistakes?" she asked before stating that Géraldo Reine de Carthage had in fact been assisted by his "brother-in-law" during all the necessary procedures, had made no complaint about brutality and had confessed to the rape of his own free will. And there's the rub. Géraldo Reine de Carthage, who was 17 at the time of events, also contests that the role of responsible party during the recording of his statement, the reading of the charges against him, medical examination and reconstruction was filled by Eric Lionne, a man who has alternatively been presented as his father and brother-in-law. The young groom contends that hedoesn't even know Eric Lionne (despite the fact that the latter has fathered a child with his sister, Jennifer Reine de Carthage, 34) and thus that he could not have acted as his responsible party.

During the "voir dire" proceedings, Me Johanne Moutou-Leckning decided not call Eric Lionne as a witness, despite his presence on the prosecution's additional witness list. Me Johanne Moutou-Leckning feared that he would confuse or mislead the court. The defence contested this decision as "one of the grounds of the present voir dire proceedings is that statements recorded were obtained, inter alia, in absence of a responsible party" and that the documents produced by the prosecution presented Eric Lionne as just that. "All primary facts must be proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. If Lionne is the responsible party, we must ascertain whether he's the father or brotherin- law []of Géraldo Reine de Carthage]," thundered Me Jean-Claude Bibi.

A compromise was then found when the defence called Eric Lionne as a witness. When examined by the defence, the latter supported Géraldo Reine de Carthage's claims. He contends that he was roped into being the responsible party on June 1 when he ped Jennifer Reine de Carthage, who is also his employee, off at the police station where she was going to help her brother. When she was refused access to him, the police directed Eric Lionne to enter and meet the suspect.

When quizzed by the prosecution as to the reasons why he never complained to a lawyer or magistrate about not wanting to be Géraldo's Reine de Carthage's responsible party, he said that he was scared to do so. Eric Lionne also affi rmed that he ended up attending the young man's court appearances, medical examination and the reconstruction of the crime out of fear of a warrant of arrest being issued against him if he didn't. Judge Premila Balgobin now has the task of ruling on the admissibility of the statements.

"If the judge rules that the statements are not admissible, it'll mean that the investigation was flawed," remarks Jean-Claude Bibi. In the event that she does throw the statements out, the prosecution's case will hinge solely on Florise Sirop's statement. Whatever the outcome of the voir dire proceedings, Géraldo Reine de Carthage, Govinda Carpenen, and Vicky Sookloll will continue to rue that day in June when they became, willingly or not, embroiled in the shocking story of Florise Sirop.