A rugby player has been acquitted of gouging out an opponent's eye.
Richard Merrett, 39, was alleged to have attacked his opponent Matthew Rolls during a rugby match on December 1, 2018.
Mr Merrett, who plays for Welsh -based rugby team Penarth RFC, was charged with unlawfully wounding Mr Rolls, who had yelled out in "extreme" pain at the defendant's "full grip" on his left eye before receiving eight stitches, Cardiff Crown Court heard.
Wales Online reports, however, that the jury returned a unanimous not guilty verdict on January 19 after deliberating for approximately two hours. Mr Merrett showed little emotion when the verdict was announced.
The trial had opened on January 18 with evidence from Mr Merrett, Mr Rolls, and the match's referee Neil Pruett as well as the Cefn Coed coach Damien Regis and the team's full back Chris Evans.
Prosecutor Tom Roberts claimed Mr Merrett had "forcibly pressed his fingers into the eye socket" of Mr Rolls during a ruck, which involves players competing for the ball on the ground. Mr Rolls was taken to hospital and needed stitches on his lower left eyelid.
Mr Merrett denied gouging Mr Rolls. He said he twice punched the Cefn Coed second row but claimed this was in self-defence after allegedly being punched twice by Mr Rolls.
Mr Roberts started his closing speech by acknowledging "discrepancies" in evidence from Mr Regis, Mr Evans, and Mr Rolls. He told the jury: "Chris Evans said both of Mr Merrett's hands were on Matthew Rolls' face. Mr Rolls said the defendant had used his left hand while Mr Regis said he had used his right."
The prosecutor conceded "details may have been lost" in more than three years since the incident but "the overall picture of the gouge remains". He added: "If they had got together to make up a story you wouldn't see the discrepancies between their stories."
Mr Roberts said the witnesses had heard Mr Rolls scream during the incident: "Get him off me, he's got my eye." Mr Merrett claimed he told the Cefn Coed coach after the violence: "If your player punches me I'm going to punch him back."
Mr Roberts described this as a "self-contradictory account", adding: "He was punched, if you're to believe him, before the ruck collapsed and before he ended up pinned on the floor. There was no punch in self-defence then, was there, even under his own account?
"So did that first punch from Matthew Rolls happen? The referee was there. He didn't see the punch did he? It simply didn't happen. Mr Merrett has made that up and lied to you about what happened to justify what happened next.
"With the second punch which Mr Merrett accused Mr Rolls of throwing think about their relative positions. Who's in a position of strength – the person on the ground or the person on their way to stand? Think about Mr Rolls being on the ground and trying to throw a punch... Surely he was in the most vulnerable position he could have been to do it. It makes no sense.
"It's not an account capable of belief, I suggest. The defendant was not punched at all by Matthew Rolls. He knows he can't justify a gouge so he says he threw a punch in self-defence, which he says could 'possibly' explain the injury to Mr Rolls' eye. It's uncorroborated by any of the other evidence you have heard."
Kevin Seal, defending Mr Merrett, said it was plausible that Mr Rolls' injury was caused by a punch rather than a gouge. He gave the example of similar boxing injuries.
He added: "If there is a grip on the face one might have expected to see some fingernail marks where he was gripped tightly but there is no evidence of that.
"The prosecution say to you: 'Why would these people lie three years later?' Well unfortunately it's a fact of life. People tell lies. If people didn't tell lies there would be no need for court and you wouldn't have to spend time sitting as jurors.
"When you say: 'This has happened to me' how do you change your mind later on? You've told the referee, who's reported it to the Welsh Rugby Union. You can't turn round and say: 'I was wrong about this' because where would that leave you?
"Mr Evans says when Mr Merrett gets to his feet that he is offering punches to 'anyone and everyone' and yet that's not seen by the referee. You might have thought he'd be able to identify the main instigator trying to take everyone on."
Mr Seal also responded to the prosecutor's claim that Mr Merrett's account was "self-contradictory". He said his client had thrown punches because the second alleged punch from Mr Rolls had been a "cheap shot" to the back of his head.
"At that point Mr Rolls would have been on his way up from the ground as well – of course he could strike Mr Merrett," Mr Seal added.
The barrister pointed out Mr Rolls and Mr Evans had claimed not to remember the referee speaking to both team captains about off-the-ball confrontations despite Mr Pruett confirming this in his evidence. "If they're prepared to lie about that what else are they prepared to lie about?" Mr Seal asked the jury.
Mr Merrett, who denied the charge, was acquitted.
Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
