Dubai woman alleges 6-hour detention in apartment. Why did court acquit businessman?

Dubai: The Dubai Court of Appeal has upheld the acquittal of a businessman accused of detaining a woman in his Business Bay apartment for around six hours and allegedly using force and threats to force her into sexual activity.

The court rejected the Public Prosecution’s appeal, finding insufficient evidence to overturn the Court of First Instance’s verdict. The businessman had faced charges of unlawfully depriving the woman of her freedom using force and threats for a sexual purpose under the UAE Crimes and Penalties Law.

Woman’s allegations

According to prosecution records, the woman told investigators she met the businessman near a nightclub and accepted his invitation to his apartment for drinks. She alleged that he pressured her to drink alcohol and refused to let her leave after she asked to go.

She also claimed he raised a shoe towards her face to threaten her, grabbed her and pushed her onto a bedroom sofa. When she tried to contact a friend, he allegedly took her phone temporarily.

The woman said she eventually messaged her friend and shared her live location when a delivery driver arrived. Her friend went to the building for help, prompting police intervention.

The businessman denied the charges, saying the woman had visited voluntarily and that he had neither restrained nor assaulted her.

Security guard’s testimony

A building security guard told the court that the woman entered voluntarily and that her visitor details were recorded in the reception system.

The guard said he accompanied police to the apartment, where the businessman opened the door. He found the woman standing in the living room with her phone. She appeared normal and began crying only after officers spoke to her, he testified.

The Court of First Instance considered the guard’s testimony and building records when assessing whether unlawful confinement had been proved. It questioned whether the account of a six-hour detention was consistent with the guard’s description of finding the woman standing with her phone.

Police accounts and disputed statements

The arresting officer said the businessman initially denied that a woman was inside, but police later found her in the apartment. The officer also reported that the businessman mentioned a financial disagreement.

Another officer, who had not attended the scene, testified that he recorded the woman’s statement at the police station. As she spoke in her native language, her friend translated her account into English.

The Court of First Instance disregarded statements attributed to the businessman in an initial police report because he had been questioned without a sworn interpreter.

The defence also argued that the complainant and her friend had failed to appear for cross-examination, leaving their accounts untested under oath.

Defence cites phone records and messages

Ali Khalaf Al Housani, the businessman’s lawyer from Ali Khalaf Al Housani Advocate and Legal Consultants, said the defence examined the case file, reconstructed the timeline and analysed telephone records and WhatsApp messages.

According to the defence, the communications showed prior contact and arrangements involving the businessman and another woman whom it alleged had helped shape the accusation. The defence claimed this woman arranged for the complainant to meet the businessman voluntarily, disputing the allegation that he had lured or detained her.

Al Housani also cited a telephone call between the businessman and his wife that allegedly lasted more than an hour during the period when the woman said she was being detained and threatened. The defence argued that the call challenged her account.

The defence presented images of the apartment entrance, arguing that its door could be opened from inside without a key. It also said the woman had retained her smartphone and could communicate, with no apparent obstacle preventing her from leaving or seeking help. Defence witnesses supported its position, the lawyer said.

The defence further challenged discrepancies between prosecution witnesses’ courtroom testimony and their earlier statements to the Public Prosecution.

Appeal court upholds acquittal

The Court of First Instance acquitted the businessman, finding insufficient evidence to establish the alleged offences, particularly the required criminal intent.

The Public Prosecution appealed, but the Court of Appeal found no sufficient grounds to overturn the verdict and upheld the acquittal.