Criminal appeal dismissed; voyeurism conviction upheld despite psychiatric evidence of sexual perversions.
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against a four-year prison sentence for rape and voyeurism. Although the appellant presented psychiatric testimony confirming his sexual perversions, the court found no reason to interfere with the original judgment. The court emphasized the gravity of the offenses against tourists and rejected the argument that the mental state warranted a lighter sentence.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IACriminal Law; Rape; Voyeurism; Sentencing: The court held that evidence of sexual perversions does not justify reducing a sentence for grave offenses of rape and voyeurism when no other mitigating circumstances are present.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*171] 1973 March 22
(STAVRINIDES, L. LOIZOU & HADJIANASTASSIOU, JJ. )
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Phivos Demetriou Melissos,
Appellant,
v.
The Republic,
Respondent.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3423).
Criminal Law - Sentence - Rape - Four years imprisonment - Appellant a voyeur - No reason shown for interfering with sentence - Appeal dismissed.
A. Pandelides, for the Appellant.
C. Antoniades, Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Court was delivered by: -
STAVRINIDES, J.: The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty by the Assize Court of Famagusta of rape. Another charge of rape which was pending before that court was admitted by him and with the consent of both sides was taken into consideration. The court sentenced the appellant to four years' imprisonment and he appeals against that sentence.
He is a carpenter,, 35 years of age, married, and has three children. In both cases the females concerned were tourists from northern Europe, and both offences were [*172] committed near Famagusta beach, where the victims had gone for a stroll. In the Assize Court the appellant called a psychiatrist, who testified that he examined the appellant and found that he "suffers from sexual perversions of being satisfied in seeing couples engage in sexual practice".
On consideration of that evidence and everything that has been said for him by his counsel we see no reason for interfering with the sentence for these grave offences and we accordingly dismiss the appeal. The sentence to run from today.
Appeal dismissed.