U.D. man charged in rape of girlfriend's sister

Delco Times ^ | June 01, 2010 | LINDA REILLY

[ConservativeStatement]

UPPER DARBY – A township man is facing rape charges after he was identified through forensic DNA testing of the victim’s aborted fetus, according to police.

The victim, 19, reported an alleged rape by her sister’s boyfriend and the accused denied the charges.

“This was her word against his,” Police Superintendent Michael Chitwood said. “If we didn’t have DNA technology, there would be no proof because he emphatically denied having any kind of sexual contact with the victim. When the DNA came back, it was his baby.”

Samuel Nyenka, 26, of the 200 block of Sherbrook Boulevard, Upper Darby, was charged Wednesday with the alleged rape that occurred in November at his house.

[a fool in paradise]

How many rapists get away with assaulting minors because planned parenthood hides the evidence and refuses to contact authorities?

[rintense]

DNA only proves he’s the father and a liar- not that a rape occurred. I’m not saying he isn’t guilty, but the way the police make this sound, because he’s the father, he’s automatically guilty.

[Russ]

As is the custom here on FR we would need pictures to determine guilt or innocence. Otherwise, a verdict cannot be rendered.

[Hacklehead]

Sounds suspicious. Why’d she “give up”? Was there a threat of violence?

[MEGoody]

. . .through forensic DNA testing of the victim’s aborted fetus. . .

Ugh. So the baby gets punished for what someone else supposedly did.

Sick world.

[Tunehead54]

“This was her word against his,” Police Superintendent Michael Chitwood said. “If we didn’t have DNA technology, there would be no proof because he emphatically denied having any kind of sexual contact with the victim. When the DNA came back, it was his baby.”

---

His credibility and emphatic denials sort of went downhill after the test results I suspect ... ;-)

[calex59]

DNA only proves he’s the father and a liar- not that a rape occurred. I’m not saying he isn’t guilty, but the way the police make this sound, because he’s the father, he’s automatically guilty.

He denied having sex with her at all. If it was consensual sex why didn't he say so? The fact he denied having sex at all pretty much points to it being rape, otherwise why deny it?

Had he said it was consensual it would still be his word against hers as you pointed out DNA doesn't prove rape, but he hung himself with his denials.

[rintense]

Clearly the man, at the very least, is dumb as a box of rocks.