Henkis told the court in a dock statement that he had been convicted before for a similar offense

Lee Henkis, 43, was convicted this afternoon of buggery, aka sodomy, or what is now legally termed an unnatural crime.

The trial began on November 12, 2012 and at least five witnesses were called to the stand by the Crown, represented by Thalia-Megan Francis.

The child, who was 9 years old in July of 2010 when the crime occurred, in testimony told the court that he had gone to Henkis’ house because he was promised a cell phone. He told the court when he arrived, Henkis told him that the phone was in the room. When he entered the room, Henkis followed and undressed him, then undressed himself. He continued that Henkis turned him around and proceeded to commit the act.

When he was through with the child, Henkis then took out a video camera and made a video of the child. He then dressed him, gave him a blue Samsung cell phone, kissed him on his cheek and sent him home.

Testimony from the child’s father corroborated what the child said. He said that he saw his son with a blue cell phone a little later on that same day at a family function.

Dr. Egbert Grinage also testified about his findings after conducting an examination on the child. The examination, which was done by inserting a finger into the anus, revealed that the child had a history of sodomy, meaning he had been sodomized on more than one occasion. The doctor further testified that when the exam was performed, there was no resistance from the child, and a boy his age should have shown resistance.

Identifying Henkis was not an issue either, as the child told the court he knows Henkis, and his mother testified that Henkis had taken some fish to the child’s house for him. And Sgt. Alejandro Cowo testified that, in a group parade that was done, when the curtain was drawn and the child saw Henkis, he said “See ah deh.”

In Henkis’ dock statement, he told the court of the injustices he had to endure and of himself. When Justice Troadio Gonzalez told him to address the jurors, he told them that he had been convicted of a similar offense before, and had served time for it. At this juncture, the judge stopped him before he could further prejudice himself. Henkis then continued by saying that he did not have sexual intercourse with the child; he only took him fishing.

That was the defense he presented to the court, and after retiring at 10:35 a.m. and returning at 2:30 p.m., the jury revealed that they didn’t believe his story and unanimously found him guilty of the crime. Sentencing has been deferred to November 28, 2012, allowing Henkis to bring mitigation witnesses and prepare his own mitigation plea. Henkis was unrepresented in court.

(Ed. NOTE: We feel it is necessary to educate our children and young people of what this kind of crime is, and what constitutes an unnatural act. It is considered an unnatural act/crime because (1) sexual intercourse is considered natural between a man and a woman; (2) the victim was carnally known, and being a child, he couldn’t give consent; (3) the victim was carnally known as per anus – meaning that the penis was inserted into the anus.

The law states that “Every person who has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any person or animal shall be liable to imprisonment for ten years.”)