News

| Submit Comments | View Comments (6)

advertisement

Woman was raped near nightclub, jury told

By Mike Wright
July 08, 2010

A FARNBOROUGH man raped a woman he had just met in a Camberley club before returning to his night out, a court has been told.

David Snook, of Sine Close, bumped into his alleged victim in Tru before forcing himself on her in a secluded part of the town centre, jurors heard.

The 22-year-old then left the woman in a distressed state before returning to the club, where he was later arrested.

But Snook, who denies rape, told the court the pair had consensual “rough sex” after the woman asked him to leave the club with her.

On the first day of his trial at Guildford Crown Court on Monday, prosecutor Karen Holt told the jury they would hear varying accounts from the alleged victim and Snook of what happened on that night.

She said that on November 14 last year, the woman had been out celebrating a birthday with a group of friends.

The court heard the group had started the night at a friend’s house before getting taxis into Camberley town centre.

The jury was told the woman and another female friend had gone in the first taxi with others following in a second cab.

Miss Holt said the alleged victim and her friend had then gone to Tru club in Camberley High Street, but the rest of their friends could not get entry on the door and the group split up.

She told the court it was while on the dancefloor of the club with her friend that the victim met Snook, who was wearing a red top.

The court heard Snook then told the woman her friends were outside and the pair left the club together.

Miss Holt said Snook told his alleged victim when he met her that his name was Jason and that the young woman had been drinking and described her state as “tipsy”.

“The woman remembers talking to a doorman, having to get tickets and asking him to hold her drink as she was only going for a minute,” said Miss Holt.

“But she did not go back to that club that night.”

She told the jury that CCTV footage showed the pair leaving the club and heading down an alley between High Street and Knoll Road before disappearing into the grassy area by the council offices and Camberley Library.

The court heard it was there that Snook pushed the woman up against a wall and raped her.

Miss Holt said: “You will hear that at one point he had her by the neck. He had appeared perfectly nice before and said ‘you want it as much as I do’.

“But she didn’t want anything and told him to get off.”

She said eventually the woman pushed Snook off and he left her to go back to the club.

The court heard the woman then walked to Knoll Road before slumping down in shock and was found by an off-duty military policeman who called the police. The jury was told officers arrested Snook shortly after in Tru.

However, Miss Holt told the jury Snook disputed the woman’s version of events, saying she had asked him to leave the club with her to get cash.

She said that when the pair walked past the cash machines on the way to the grassy area, Snook claimed the victim told him they would get money later.

The court was told that when the pair got to the grassy area they sat on a wall. Snook said the woman had a cigarette, put her arm around him and was kissing him.

The jury heard Snook then described the couple having “rough sex” but said it was consensual and that the alleged victim was laughing and joking afterwards.

He said he lost the woman when, as they made their way back to the club, she disappeared.

The trial continues.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (6)

Most recent user comments 6 of 6

Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

   See here for update - http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2074574_man_cleared_of_rape_it_was_just_rough_sex
Editor, Guildford
15/07/2010 at 17:28 Offensive or Inappropriate?
   given that he has since been cleared is it really necessary to have this on the first page of your website?? perhaps the subsequent story should be more prominent
naughtybadger, surrey
15/07/2010 at 17:01 Offensive or Inappropriate?
   The current situation ruins lives and I don't see why both parties can not be granted anonymity until the case is proven, and then identities made public.
dp36, farnborough
13/07/2010 at 22:18 Offensive or Inappropriate?
   Because the law, as it stands, guarantees anonymity for rape complainants. This is a measure enacted to encourage them to report to police, and to see through the court case. Rape cases have a high attrition rate, in spite of the fact that in order for a prosecution to be brought, it has to meet the CPS standards which are rigorous.

There have been some high profile cases recently where women have lied about being raped, and have dragged some man's name through the dirt, making them the victim. I don't condone that kind of behaviour at all - it brings the legal system into disrepute and makes people think that all women might be lying about this kind of thing. But, the fact remains, that rape is a dreadful crime, which is under-reported in this country (compare the official crime statistics with the British Crime Survey, for example). It's not a perfect measure, but it's the only one we've got at the moment.
J P
12/07/2010 at 11:48 Offensive or Inappropriate?
   Dan - as far as I'm aware complainants are currently given anonymity in rape cases. You might have seen in the news recently they are also considering giving the defendant anonymity, although this in itself raises a fairly complicated debate.
dave2009
10/07/2010 at 11:17 Offensive or Inappropriate?
   This isn't a comment about this case but I would like to know why only one side of the party is named in the press? Why should one side receive anonymity while the accused has his name include in the report?
Dan B, North Camp
8/07/2010 at 20:49 Offensive or Inappropriate?
Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

Add Your Comments

Business Finder
 
 
Homes / Jobs Search
 
Jobs Homes

Brought to you by

Get the Job
Newsletter Sign Up
 
Sign up to the
weekly news
update


Submit
Loading poll, please wait...