girlfriend of her liberty, was acquitted in Supreme Court yesterday.

The 37-year-old was found not guilty of each count by a seven-woman, five-man jury who deliberated for some two hours.

The jury also found him not guilty of the lesser count of sexual assault which they were asked to consider if they found him not guilty of serious sexual assault.

"I am very happy for my client. This has been a long ordeal for him.'' said defence lawyer, Richard Horseman, speaking at the end of his first Supreme Court trial. "I think the correct verdict was arrived at.'' It was alleged that the man had stalked the 50-year-old woman after she broke up with him and then forced her into an abandoned house where he raped her in June of last year.

In his closing remarks, Mr. Horseman drew the jury's attention to the discrepancies in the testimonies of the defendant and the complainant.

"Who does the physical evidence support?'' he asked the jury, referring to the lack of any sign of a violent struggle between the pair.

The court had already heard the testimony of Dr. Keith Cunningham who stated that there was no bruising found on the woman's body and that the woman's long prosthetic nails remained intact in spite of the alleged struggle.

Equally the woman's underpants which were admitted as an exhibit in court showed no signs of damage.

Mr. Horseman reminded the jurors that the only evidence against his client were the words of the complainant herself.

He questioned the complainant's testimony, saying that her actions spoke louder than words. He suggested that the woman had ample opportunity to contact the Police if she had wanted to and reminded the jury that the woman voluntarily accompanied the defendant into Somers Gardens in St. George's.

Crown Counsel Charlene Scott emphasised that the absence of physical injury on the victim's body did not prove that a serious sexual assault had not taken place.

And she stressed that the defendant's contact with the complainant in the week before the alleged assault was not coincidental and stated he had followed her with "the intention of causing physical or mental harm''.

Ms Scott referred to the "fantastic story'' created by the accused in his defence and remarked that the jury would have to have been "all born yesterday'' in order to believe his words.

In his summary, Chief Justice Austin Ward instructed the jury to put any sympathy they might feel for the complainant or accused out of their minds and consider if either person had motive to lie.

He told the jury to consider whether the complainant "had been sending the accused mixed messages'' and "whether the no was a genuine no''.

After the verdict was returned, the defendant was discharged by the Chief Justice with a stern warning.

"When a lady tells you she wants space you should give her space'' he said before informing the man he was free to go.