Well tonight, the news is that the man who everyone suspected as the culprit was acquitted today in Magistrate's Court of indecent assault.

As we reported, the mother of child even made attempts to come out publicly because she was not satisfied that police were properly investigating this relative whose name was being called by the child.

Well, if today's outcome is indication, the police couldn't prove it then, and they couldn't prove it in the trial either. We can't reveal any names or show any photographs of the man because the child's identity would be compromised, but his trial started last week Monday before Chief Magistrate Anne Marie Smith.

The prosecution called the child to testify in closed court, and she told the court that on September 22, 2011, the accused took her to another relative's house, forced to lie down, took off her clothes, and fondled her.

But under cross examination by the attorney for the accused was able to show the court many inconsistencies of details with the child's story. The mother of the child then took the stand and testified that on the day in question, she sent her babysitter to go pick the child up from her school, but the babysitter could not find her there because she had already been picked up by someone else.

She continued that she visited the house where the assault allegedly happened, and she found her daughter who was acting strangely. When the mother questioned the child, she said that someone touched her, which caused her to examine the child. What found caused her alarm, and she allegedly took the child to the doctor who certified that the child was carnally known.

Again, the attorney for the defense presented a secondary report from this same doctor who said that there was no bruising; according to this report, there was no evidence that she was carnally known, and the evidence found could have indicated a urinary tract infection. When the prosecution closed its case, the accused denied all claims of sexual assault, and he only admitted that he did pick up the child from school.

He also called a witness on his behalf, who told the court that the child was under her observation the entire time after she came home from school, and nothing happened like what was being claimed. The attorney for the defense made submissions after closing his case saying that there were too many inconsistencies to convict the accused.