THE alleged victim of a knife attack by a 37-year-old woman has given evidence for the defence – saying he did not believe she intended to harm him.
The man was appearing on the second day of an Assize jury trial at the Royal Court of Nilza Vieira, who is accused of grave and criminal assault.
Ms Vieira claimed that the man made her angry by filming her on his mobile phone and shouting abuse, and she had hit out to stop him recording the row – accidentally injuring his thigh with a knife.
The incident took place in the early hours of 25 November last year, with the alleged victim going to the States police headquarters and Ms Vieira being arrested shortly afterwards.
However, speaking through a Portuguese interpreter, the alleged victim gave evidence for the defence. He said he believed Ms Vieira only wanted to frighten him.
He told the court that she had set the knife down on a table after brandishing it. Advocate Rui Tremoceiro, defending, asked him: “Did she pick the knife up again while you were there?”
He said: “No.”
The advocate asked: “Did you say to officers that you wanted to make a complaint?”
He again replied: “No.”
Crown Advocate Lauren Hallam, prosecuting, said to him: “The knife connected with your leg when she thrust it towards you, didn’t it?”
He said: “I didn’t even notice at the time. It was just a few minutes after that I noticed.”
However in her closing statement, Advocate Hallam told the jury of six men and six women that the incident was “a clear and obvious grave and criminal assault”.
She said: “She was angry, she was frustrated, she grabbed a knife and she lunged with it.”
Advocate Hallam also disputed Ms Vieira’s account that she had only tried to stop the alleged victim from filming her.
She said: “The knife was not aimed at the phone. It was aimed at his body. The defendant cannot possibly have been trying to knock the phone out of his hands, because she simply didn’t aim there.”
She added: “Trying to scare someone by thrusting with a knife is extremely reckless. When a knife is used in anger or to scare someone the consequences can be very serious.”
However, in his closing statement, Advocate Tremoceiro told the jury: “We may feel her request to stop recording was a reasonable one.
“No one likes being filmed against their will. But she did not intend to hurt him. He mentioned that she may have intended just to scare him. He said that to contrast with the suggestion that she wanted to harm him.”
The trial is expected to conclude today. Commissioner Alan Binnington is presiding.
