A prophet who a female congregant accused of sexual assault was freed of the charges after one of the woman’s friends told the court the complainant had said she wanted to “set up” the preacher.
The Family Court upheld a no case submission by defence counsel, Kay Bacchus-Baptiste and told Prophet Jason Providence, 38, that he was free to go.
WhatsApp messages between Providence and the virtual complainant, a 23-year-old woman, which she said she had deleted, cast further doubt on her claims.
“It was terrifying because she was so convincing on examination-in-chief and looked so traumatised that if he didn’t have these messages, we wouldn’t have been able to save him. I couldn’t,” Bacchus Baptiste told iWitness News.
“It would’ve been difficult to say that she just lied and made up all this thing. The details — where he pulled the chair, opened the thing, took out the drink, the colour of the bottle, the lighting; details, details. That’s what disturbed me. It really, really disturbed me that, as I said, we have to be so careful when women accuse men of doing these sexual things because sometimes, it is just his word against hers,” the lawyer said.
Providence, of Old Montrose/Lowmans Hill, was released on bail in July 2022 when he was slapped with a single count of indecent assault.
However, Bacchus-Baptiste said that that charge was withdrawn in February 2023, and replaced with two counts of indecent assault.
The virtual complainant alleged that Providence wrapped her hands around his penis and tried to kiss her during one of the sessions intended to deliver her from “demonic attacks”.
“She said that she was suffering from spiritual attack, or demonic attack as she had been doing before and he assisted her,” Bacchus-Baptiste told iWitness News.
“And she came back this time and he took her to his studio, which I think he took her before.”
The lawyer said the virtual complainant alleged that Providence gave her something to drink and indecently assaulted her.
“And she went home totally depressed and upset and traumatised. So basically, that was her story. She also said that while she was there, he called one of her best friends who was also a member of the church and a witness, saying that the virtual complainant ‘don’t want to bite’,” the lawyer told iWitness News, adding that she was not sure what the expression meant.
The lawyer, however, said that on cross examination, it was revealed that when the virtual complainant got home, she messaged Providence via WhatsApp, referring to him as “pastor” and reporting that she was safely at home.
“He said ‘Okay. Great.’ And then she gave him the prayer sign. And then next morning, she messaged him again and said good morning and so forth.
“And they spoke about her son who was sick. And then she said she wanted him to come by the house because he was thinking it had to be something wrong with the house why this attack came back. And she said that she couldn’t make it to church but she watched him live.”
Bacchus-Baptiste said the conversations continued for about five months.
“This happened from the very day, the event when she got home,” the lawyer said, referring to the WhatsApp conversations.
“So, she had to accept that it was her conversation. … At one time, she said she deleted the messages and another time she told the police she changed her phone.
“But when I cross examined her, she admitted to deleting these messages.”
The lawyer said that the prosecution called as a witness the virtual complainant’s best friend, a female who is also a member of the church.
“… he (Providence) had messages where she (the witness) had messaged him sometime after the incident and told him that this girl wants to set him up and she’s not in agreement with it, and she’s going to stop being her good friend. And she also accepted that those messages did exist.”
Bacchus-Baptiste said she made a no case submission that the evidence was unbelievable and dangerous. “And if it was that unbelievable, I don’t know that there’s anything left to defend. And the court upheld it.”
The lawyer said the prosecution also called a pastor as a witness but his evidence was mostly hearsay and irrelevant and she objected to it.
The matter, as is the case with all sexual offences proceedings, was heard in camera at the Family Court.
The Evidence set him.free but why he did not get his wife involved in.the process? […]