The Court of Appeal has rejected the appeal submitted by a convicted officer, upholding the lower court’s ruling that imposed a three-month prison sentence without suspension for indecent assault against a colleague.
Case background and trial
Dated 2 February, the Court of Appeal’s decision reviews the events leading to the case. Before the Nicosia District Court, the appellant faced four charges. The first concerned indecent assault against a female colleague in March 2018. The second alleged sexual harassment for the same incident, while the remaining two charges involved common assault on the same complainant on different dates.
The appellant denied all charges. After a full hearing, the district court found him guilty, sentencing him to three months’ immediate imprisonment for the first charge and one month for each of the third and fourth charges. No sentence was imposed on the second charge, which overlapped with the first. The court ordered the sentences to run concurrently and denied suspension.
Incident details
The complainant and the accused joined the Cyprus Police around the same period. In early March 2018, the officer began sending messages to the complainant via mobile, Facebook, and Viber. Initially, she responded, but after he expressed romantic interest, she asked him to stop contacting her.
Despite her refusal, the officer continued messaging. During a class break in March 2018 at the Cyprus Police Academy, the complainant went to a classroom to retrieve personal items. The officer, standing near the door, touched her waist and buttocks. Shocked and panicked, she did not react immediately but later reported the incident to colleagues at the academy canteen.
Following their academy training, both were assigned to security units in December 2018. In March 2019, the officer again struck her with his elbow. On 19 April 2019, during a break at EKEM training, he approached her in a corridor and hit her again with his elbow. Realising he would not stop, she decided to formally report him for indecent assault and repeated attacks.
Appeal arguments
The appellant argued that the district court erred in assessing the complainant’s credibility, improperly evaluated witness testimony, and wrongly dismissed contradictions in key witness statements. He also claimed that the court failed to consider coaching allegations and incomplete police investigation.
Court of Appeal ruling
The Court of Appeal rejected all arguments. It noted the district court examined every witness, compared accounts, and justified its findings. The court emphasised that the exact wording used by witnesses matters less than the interpretation of their descriptions of events. The appeal court also found no evidence to support claims of coaching or negligent investigation.
Sentencing considerations
Regarding the sentence, the appellant claimed it was excessive, disproportionate given his clean record, age, and prior conduct, and wrongly refused suspension. Conversely, the Attorney General argued the three-month sentence was insufficient, given the offence’s seriousness and the need for deterrence.
The Court of Appeal confirmed the district court had properly considered all circumstances, including the offender’s role as a police officer, the nature and severity of the offences, and the impact on the victim. It found the prison sentence proportionate, neither excessive nor inadequate, and reaffirmed the necessity of custodial punishment to deter similar behaviour.
The appeal court concluded there were no grounds to overturn the district court’s decision. All appeals were dismissed, and the original ruling stands.
Also read: Robbery at a kiosk in Larnaca – Suspect grabbed cash and fled
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
