An appellant said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling by which he was convicted of indecent assault on a female had erred in the application of law and had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the court had established its ruling on the grounds of the testimonies of the victim and the witnesses though they included many contradictions. He also said that the testimony of the victim contradicted the results of a medical report.

The court said that this argument was invalid. The court said that the court considered all aspects of the incident properly and concluded that the elements of the crime existed in the case. The court said that the evaluation of the validity of the testimonies of the relevant parties fell under the court's authority. The court said that the court was satisfied with the testimonies of the different parties. The court said that the court established its ruling on the grounds of solid evidence and that the appellant's defence was irrelevant in this regard.

The court dismissed the appeal.