Hong Kong – A Swedish businessman convicted of raping a domestic worker has launched an appeal, arguing the jury may have been improperly influenced by evidence regarding a separate, unproven allegation. Patrik Tobias Ekstrom, 41, was sentenced to seven years in prison in August 2024 after being found guilty of one count of rape and one count of non-consensual buggery. He remains on bail pending the outcome of the appeal hearing, which began Wednesday at the Court of Appeal.
The case centers around an incident in October 2022 involving Ekstrom’s then-domestic worker, identified in court documents as X, a Nepali national. X testified that Ekstrom, appearing intoxicated upon returning to their Shek O home late on October 27, 2022, forced her into his bedroom and sexually assaulted her. At the time of the alleged assault, Ekstrom’s wife and their three children were traveling in Japan.
During the appeal hearing, Elizabeth Herbert, Ekstrom’s barrister, contended that the trial judge failed to adequately instruct the jury regarding the admissibility of testimony concerning a previous domestic worker, known as Mohini. According to reports, X testified that Ekstrom had admitted to having committed a similar act against Mohini. Herbert argued that the jury could have mistakenly interpreted this statement as proof of a prior offense, rather than hearsay.
“It must be material,” Herbert stated, emphasizing that the alleged prior incident involved a similar victim and a comparable allegation. Antony Leung, the government prosecutor, acknowledged that a clearer direction from the judge regarding the hearsay nature of the testimony would have been preferable, but maintained that the trial’s fairness was not significantly impacted. He argued that the jury was unlikely to have been unduly swayed by the unproven claim.
The appeal also addressed the admissibility of voice messages sent by X to Ekstrom’s wife, Fumi, following the alleged assault. Herbert argued that these messages, admitted as evidence of a “recent complaint” – a legal concept referring to a victim promptly reporting an assault to a third party – should not have been considered, as X did not explicitly state she had been raped in the recordings.
Court of Appeal Judge Andrew Macrae countered that X had explained during her testimony that she deliberately avoided providing explicit details to Fumi, fearing that her husband would be questioned. He acknowledged “human frailty” and suggested that someone in X’s position might understandably hesitate to be fully forthcoming. Macrae noted that the messages conveyed the “flavour” of the alleged assault, referencing Ekstrom’s reported statements to X.
Leung argued that the voice messages did not require the explicit use of the words “rape” or “buggery” to qualify as a recent complaint. He further pointed out that X reported the incident to the police within three hours of sending the messages, bolstering the prosecution’s case. During the original trial, Ekstrom testified that he and X had engaged in a consensual intimate relationship prior to the alleged assault, and claimed X had requested financial assistance during a sexual encounter.
At the sentencing hearing, Judge Derek Chan referenced a psychological report that assessed Ekstrom’s risk of re-offending as being on the “high end of the moderate risk” scale. The court will consider these factors, along with the arguments presented during the appeal, as it deliberates on the case.
The outcome of this appeal could set a precedent for how courts handle similar cases involving allegations of sexual assault and the admissibility of potentially prejudicial evidence. The Court of Appeal’s decision is expected in the coming weeks. The case highlights the complexities of prosecuting sexual assault cases and the importance of ensuring fair trial procedures.
If you or someone you know needs aid, you can contact the Hong Kong Social Welfare Department’s 24-hour hotline at 2343 2255.
Stay with Archyde.com for further updates on this developing story.
