Case No. ZC20C00674

i)KB cannot speak to the events in late February or early March 2020 when she was raped by GH – she does not have the capacity to do so. There is no evidence that she has ever alluded to the events. I have referred to GH’s accounts to the police in interview and to the Crown Court through his probation report. To this court he gave a new and different account. He said that AB had tricked him by leaving him alone with KB during the daytime having, as he said he believed, encouraged or coached KB to take off her clothes and go to him. AB had then returned after 20 minutes, earlier than expected, and found KB and GH having sexual intercourse. His evidence left me entirely unclear as to the motive AB would have for “tricking” him in this way. Moreover, it would be a curious plan by AB given that there was no history of KB being intimate with GH and, on GH’s account, AB was only gone for 20 minutes. How could she possibly have known that on return she would find KB and GH having sexual intercourse even if she had encouraged KB to go to GH naked? GH had not previously alleged that AB had played such a role, it would be wholly contrary to AB’s protectiveness and love of KB to do what GH alleged, and it is almost inconceivable that KB would be capable of following such an instruction. GH’s allegations were wholly incredible and very hurtful to KB’s family. By making such allegations GH showed, once more, his failure to take any responsibility for his actions. I reject without hesitation any suggestion that AB played any role in “setting up” a sexual encounter between KB and GH or that KB approached GH in a sexualised manner. Nothing in her previous or subsequent conduct has shown any sexualised behaviour or such disinhibition. ii)However, I am sure that what GH told me was truthful to this limited extent – he raped KB when AB was out of the house. At the time when the rape occurred GH would have had no opportunity to rape KB anywhere except inside the family home. In my judgement, it is most unlikely that the rape took place when someone else was in the family home. GH is unlikely to have taken the risk of being discovered raping KB with someone else in the house. On the evidence I have received, KB is unlikely to have been silent in the circumstances which would have been foreign to her and therefore likely to distress her. The layout of the house is such that it would have been unlikely, if not impossible, for sexual intercourse to have taken place unnoticed by anyone else who was at home at the time. Considering all these matters alongside GH’s own evidence, I conclude that it is highly probable that GH raped KB in the family home when no-one else was present. iii)Other than the admission that the rape took place when GH was alone with KB in the family home, GH’s evidence about the rape lacks any credibility and I reject it. The Local Authority has not alleged that AB, CD or EF, were complicit in or present at the time of the rape or that they knew in the immediate aftermath what had occurred. The evidence establishes that on the balance of probabilities GH raped KB when left alone with her in the family home. That is his own evidence and it accords with the other evidence in the case. Accordingly, I do not accept AB’s evidence that she never left KB alone with GH. She has maintained that stance throughout these proceedings: it is what she told the authorities and it was what she has told CD and EF. However, I find it not to be credible. AB had no reason to protect KB from GH in that way and it would been natural for her sometimes to go out from the house to run errands or to do some work associated with her Church. She was a very busy woman and could not take KB everywhere with her. Leaving KB with another family member would be an entirely natural thing for her to do. At the relevant time, AB regarded GH as a member of the family. I conclude that AB has misled the court, her children, and others about leaving KB alone with GH because she wants to avoid being accused of being negligent in relation to her daughter’s care. She is afraid of being accused of allowing GH to rape KB by leaving them alone together and so she has denied ever having done so. I find that she did leave them alone, that it was natural to do so, and that she had no reason not to do so. There is no evidence that GH had acted inappropriately with KB previously, no evidence that he had been guilty of sexual assault or other sexually inappropriate behaviour with others previously, and he had spent a great deal of time with KB at the family home over several years without giving cause of concern that she needed protecting from him.iv)GH mentioned male lodgers as potential perpetrators to the police. In the light of his admission they can be discounted as perpetrators but, in any event, GH’s evidence about lodgers was inconsistent with other evidence and I do not accept it. He appeared to allege that there were lodgers in the family home in February or March 2020, at the time of the rape, but there is no evidence to corroborate that allegation. I accept the family’s evidence that two men had stayed at the family home for a short period some months earlier. 41.