KUWAIT CITY, Nov 2: The Appeals Court upheld an earlier ruling and acquitted a police officer who was accused of kidnapping and molesting a girl. 
The Public Prosecution arraigned the officer on the above-mentioned charge and stated that on May 7, 2008, the accused forced two girls to stop near Mubarak Al-Kabeer Police Station. He allegedly asked one of the girls to get into a patrol vehicle and drove with the other in the latter’s car to a place where he molested her.
The suspect’s lawyer insisted that all the charges against his client were fabricated and pointed out the contradictions in the complainant’s statement. He also showed the criminal investigations report which stated that nothing belonging to the suspect was found on the girl.

Man absolved:  The Appeals Court, presided over by Judge Anwar Al-Enezi, overturned the verdict of Criminal Court, which sentenced a Kuwaiti man to three years imprisonment on drug possession and trafficking charges, and acquitted him.
The Public Prosecution called the Kuwaiti the fourth suspect in a drug trafficking case after the other three suspects claimed that he too was involved. The suspect’s lawyer, however, argued that there is no document or any other evidence to prove his client’s involvement in the case.

Case ‘dismissed’: The Cassation Court refused to accept a case filed by members of the Salmiya Club against the club’s board chairman. With this, the dispute between members and the board has been settled and the current board of directors will continue their term. Lawyer Ali Al-Asfour said he was confident that justice will be served and added that the case was clear from the beginning. 

‘No breach of trust’: The Court of Appeals presided by Consultant Salah Al-Houti supported the ruling of a Criminal Court and acquitted a suspect in a breach of trust case.
The suspect was accused of breaching trust after he allegedly received the proceeds of a company and declined to deposit the funds in the company account. However, the defendant’s lawyer Mishal Subah argued the accusation was baseless because the company has been established on paper and the nominal contract indicates the company revenue belongs to his client. The lawyer supported the claim with an expert report and testimony of witnesses.