# 17 Does APLE (Action pour les Enfants) believe that David Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial?

Ana G. Pinheiro, Legal Coordinator

Thierry Darnaudet

Action pour les Enfants (APLE Cambodia)

Dear Ana and Thierry

You have not responded in any way to my letters of 16^th and 22^nd Oct. Perhaps you hope that by not answering questions from myself and others in the media, that APLE can escape the kind of scrutiny that all NGOs should be subjected to?

Alas, experiences suggests that most in the media eventually give up asking questions if they continue to be stone-walled. Or they are fearful of being hit with a law-suit based on evidence as flimsy (or non-existent) as that which has been used to convict David Fletcher.

Unless APLE should decide to use its influence to have the hearing on Monday held ‘in camera’, it will take place in a public context. The words and actions of all involved will be on public display and be reported accurately (hopefully) in the media.

Given Yang Dany’s intact hymen after the alleged rapes and her insisting, now, that no rapes took place, the following question arises:

“Who provided the court with all the graphic details of the actual rapes themselves? Yang Dany?”

As an 18 year old virgin at the time David Fletcher was charged, Yang Dany would have had little idea of what sexual intercourse involves. Her account of what took place is more graphic and detailed than one would expect from a Cambodian virgin! Indeed, when I interviewed Yang Dany on this subject she still seemed remarkably naïve about the mechanics of sex. Interestingly, she had no idea that a document had been presented to the court in which her intact hymen was confirmed. This leads me to wonder, as I would like to think a competent court would:

“Who supplied the lurid details of the rapes that appear in the court reports?”

“Was it Yang Dany’s mother Sekun?”

“Were these graphic descriptions manufactured by the Anti-Human Trafficking unit at the Ministry of the Interior? If so, at whose behest?”

“Did someone within one of the many NGOs involved in this matter, even APLE perhaps, put words into Dany’s mouth or get her to apply a thumb print to a statement that she had not made but that had been made on her behalf?”

It is clear talking with Yang Dany, both on and off camera, that there are some details of how it came to be, in the course of a few weeks, that David Fletcher went from being her ‘fiance’, ‘boyfriend’, ‘sweetheart’ and a ‘good man’ to being a brutal rapist! She is fearful to talk about this part of her story.

In a properly constituted court, of course, Yang Dany would be obliged under oath to tell the court, if such be the case, who it was who induced her to change her story. Or, if she decided to change it of her own volition, why she changed it. The fact that Yang Dany’s change of story was accompanied by a demand from her mother of the sum of $30,000 should have set alarm bells ringing for the court and for APLE. It did not.

My questions here are rhetorical. I do not expect answers from you both. It is not for any of us to answer questions such as these. This is what properly constituted courts are for – to sort through allegations and evidence, to expose lies, and to determine, in an objective manner, what took actually place. Or what is the most likely explanation for what has occurred. In a properly constituted court the prosecution presents its own version of the narrative. And the defense presents its version of the narrative. The judges then decide which version is most likely to be true.  In the event that the judges cannot determine which version is true, with any certainly, the accused must be set free.

This is, of course, Law 101 – the kind of information imparted to 1^st year university student lawyers in the first week of their first semester. Unfortunately, these basic principles all too often do not apply in Cambodia.

The judicial system has failed David Fletcher. If he is to be found guilty it must be on the basis of evidence that can be subjected to scrutiny, statements and evidence that can be challenged by a lawyer representing the accused. It is inappropriate that Mr Fletcher should be found guilty without being given the opportunity to mount a case in his own defense. This is all that Mr Fletcher is asking for in court on Monday 27^th Oct.

APLE will be free in court to oppose Mr Fletcher’s request for a fair trial.  I would be very interested to hear the logic presented to the court by APLE in support of this proposition, given that Mr Fletcher’s human and legal rights have been so comprehensively (and demonstrably) breached. APLE is also free, should it choose, not to oppose Mr Fletcher’s request for a re-trial but to vigorously insist, in court, on his right to a proper trial.

I am sure, Ana, that as a lawyer you can have no objection to the proposition that Mr Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure – even though the end result, a verdict of ‘innocent’, may not be to APLE’s liking and may raise questions about the NGO’s modus operandi.

The choice for APLE on Monday is between upholding the rule of Cambodian law – not opposing Mr Fletcher’s request for a re-trial - or allowing to continue a miscarriage of justice that serves APLE’s commercial interests.

Your call, Ana and Thierry.

best wishes

James Ricketson