This is part three and the concluding part of our discourse on the case between one young man who sued a lady and her parent for rejecting his marriage proposal. In part one; we looked at the submissions of that man when the case came up for hearing in the court.
In part two, we looked at how the lady started her defense and the diary she tendered as evidence. I hope that you have read the part two, if not GO HERE to read the part two as this is the continuation of the part two.
In Continuation of her defense, the lady, argued that the man capitalize on the level of her parent’s poverty to $exually abuse her in their presence. It was as a result of her parent’s poverty that they had to endure such insult and humiliation in the hands of the man.
The lady also argued that her parents raised her to be a responsible lady that it was only the man who ever had $ex with her, yet her parents had to endure such an insult and humiliation, in fact it was a great sacrilege an abomination.
At this point and while shading tears, she explained how she always wept after the man had finished having $ex with her in her father’s house having realized that her parents were fully aware of what was happening.
She explained how her parents used to pretend of not knowing that the man was demanding and having $ex with her in their presence with their full knowledge.
It was at this point that her parents burst into tears, weeping loud uncontrollable in the court, blaming their poverty for the reason or the cause why they allowed the man to insult or humiliate them so much.
For the man to have the gut to be coming to his residence to demand and be having $ex with their daughter against her will many times in their presence was abomination or sacrilege.
The father of that lady further explained how he and his wife used to pretend and vacate their home any time the man visited her daughter in his residence as it pained them to be around and see and allow the man to be having $ex with their daughter with their full knowledge.
According to him, the most painful aspect was allowing the man to visit and sleep in their house with their daughter in the same house, how he and his wife will be sleeping in one room while the man will be having $ex with their daughter not married to him in the next room.
In other words, the man used to come and sleep with their daughter in his house with their full knowledge which was a sacrilege or an abomination, but they endured it for the reason of their poverty.
It was at this juncture that many women in the court also joined them to shade tears while cursing the man, saying that what the man did was not only a sacrilege but a wicked act that should not go unpunished.
Also, continuing in her defense, the lady further argued that the man must pay her extra amount for the number of times he came to her school hostel to demand and had $ex with her right on her bed in the school hostel.
According to the lady, she explained how the man visited her one day in her school and started romancing her in the presence and watchful eyes of her two roommates.
By what her roommates saw that day, they decided and vacated their hostel room telling her to attend to the man but should make sure that they get through within two hours.
In other words, she said that right from that day, the man used to visit her in her school hostel almost every week just to have $ex with her on her bed in their school hostel.
She argued that she suppose to charge the man double the amount for those numbers of times he demanded and had $ex with her on her bed in the school hostel.
The lady further argued that the man’s actions that day compelled her to explain to her roommates reasons she was allowing the man to be having $ex with her which was in exchange for the amounts of money the man used to give her, which made her roommates to understand and allowed her.
That explained the reason they used to vacate her hostel room every time the man visited her as to allow the man to have $ex with her right on her bed in their hostel room.
At that juncture, in fact, it was as if everybody in the court turned and started pitying the lady, as to what she $exually endured in the hands of that man who they claimed turned her to a $ex machine
Even the man’s family members as well said that they thought that the man was offering her free financial assistance not knowing that the lady had been forced to be paying him back as he used to demand and have $ex with her even at odd places and times.
The lady further argued that the man visits her and demand for $ex even when she was preparing or taking her exams, whether she was in the mood to have $ex or not as he always insists on her satisfying him with $ex.
The female judge after listening to the submission and defense of both parties, appointed three people from the audience (two educated women and a man) to go and verify the content of the man and the lady’s dairies to confirm what they said.
It happened that after the three people had returned after confirming the total amount the man quoted and then multiplied the number of times the man had $ex with the lady with the amount the lady said she was charging him they arrived at the total amount.
The judge after seeing the total amount of the man and that of the lady she busted into laughter. And at that juncture she called the two lawyers representing both parties and asked them to go and discuss with their clients based on the contents of the two diaries, how both parties can reach for the out-of-court settlement
The judge called the lawyer representing the man and showed him the amount arrived at and as well told him that his client has no case. It was at this point that the lawyer of the man addressed the court and applying for the immediate withdrawal of the case, saying that they want to settle out of court.
I decided to share this story even though it contained some $ex stories was to caution men who feel that they are giving ladies financial assistance but at the same time demanding and having $ex with these ladies.
Also, the ladies in turn, they should be wise and note that men hardly give them free financial assistance as they always demand for something in return especially $ex. What then is your own intake or judgment in the above case? Shalom!
