Domestic worker accusing Swedish ex-employer of raping her is lying, defence says in Hong Kong court
Hong Kong Free Press
A lawyer representing a Swedish businessman accused of raping his domestic worker has said she told a “pack of lies” to a Hong Kong court.
The trial of Patrik Tobias Ekstrom, 36, continued at the High Court on Thursday. He is accused of one count of rape and one count of non-consensual buggery over an alleged incident in October 2022, involving his then-domestic worker.
See also: Domestic worker accuses ex-employer of rape, tells court he threatened to kill her
The alleged victim, identified only as X, continued her testimony via video link from another room in the building. She spoke in Nepalese, with her statements translated into English via an interpreter.
Defence counsel Simon So began his cross-examination of X on Thursday after the prosecution finished its questioning. He cast doubt several times on the authenticity of her statements and questioned why she had not physically resisted or attacked Ekstrom if she had not consented to the sexual acts.
The court heard on Wednesday that the incident took place after Ekstrom returned to his Shek O home, where X lived with her employers, just before midnight on October 27, 2022. X testified that Ekstrom’s wife had left for Japan earlier in the day with the couple’s three children. Ekstrom, who appeared drunk, told X he wanted to have a “sexual relationship” with her and forced her upstairs to have sexual intercourse and anal sex.
According to the prosecution’s opening statement, Ekstrom admitted having sex with X but said it was consensual.
On Thursday, So referred to X’s statement that Ekstrom was speaking loudly and emotionally to her in the living room area when asking for a “sexual relationship” with her.
After X confirmed that Ekstrom’s driver and his uncle were at home, and that the house was “super quiet” at the time, So questioned why Ekstrom’s supposed yelling had gone unheard.
X said the driver’s room was in the basement, where there was echoing and “loud noise” caused by the sound of flowing water. She also said he had had “some drinks.”
So said this was “completely not true,” and that the driver was an employee on duty. X said both the driver and herself were exhausted from taking care of the uncle.
“This is all [a] complete pack of lies,” So said.
When the defence counsel said his uncle should have heard the noise, X said the uncle was not wearing his hearing aid.
‘I was very scared’
So also questioned why X did not physically resist Ekstrom or scream for help if she did not consent to the sexual acts.
So said that while Ekstrom was supposedly forcing X up the stairs and into the master bedroom, she could have slammed his body into the wall or the handrails.
“Those are impossible things,” she said.
So also confirmed with X that Ekstrom had placed his hand on his shoulder. He suggested that she could have scratched his hand, and asked whether she bit him. X could have taken one of the photo frames on a wall leading to the master bedroom and used that to hit him, he said.
X said she could not possibly do that because he was the one next to the photos, and also because he was bigger than her. The court heard on Wednesday that she was of small stature.
So then brought up X’s height and weight, and said he meant no disrespect but that – per medical evidence – she was overweight. “You definitely had the strength if you want[ed] to resist, am I correct?”
X replied that she was not in a good physical state and in particular had knees that swelled so badly she had trouble using the bathroom. Her injuries were due to overwork, she added.
So then went on to question why X did not put up a stronger show of resistance inside the bedroom.
He said that if she really did not want to have sex with Ekstrom, there would have been “pulling [and] pushing” while he tried to take off her t-shirt.
X replied that she resisted verbally and emphasised that the events were against her will.
So also asked about Ekstrom removing her underwear, suggesting that she could have tried to hold on to the waistband. X, who was crying during this part of the testimony, said she had already “lost all [her] energy.”
“I was very scared. I was already thinking he’s definitely going to kill me,” she said.
‘That’s what I saw’
Thursday marked the third day of the trial, which is expected to last eight days.
Earlier on Thursday, So also suggested that Ekstrom had not forced X to have sex with him, but given her a choice to have sex with him or see her employment terminated.
X said she had declined his sexual advances and agreed to leave. But Ekstrom then told her that he “still wanted” her, and then grabbed her and told her he would give her “a lot of money.”
The witness added that Ekstrom threatened to kill and hit her, and also told her to “give” him her daughter. X cried as she spoke.
In response, So said it could not be true that Ekstrom had given X the “choice to have sex with him or leave, while also saying that he would kill her. This was “self-contradictory” and “illogical,” he said.
“What do you want me to do? That’s what I saw, that’s what I heard with my own eyes [sic],” X said.
X also quoted Ekstrom as saying he had done “the same” to another domestic worker who used to work for him.
The trial was adjourned to Friday, when So will continue his cross-examination.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.