The Tribune

By FARRAH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

fjohnson@tribunemedia.net

A MAN was brought to tears yesterday after a Supreme Court jury found him not guilty of having sex with a three-year-old boy in November 2019.

After two hours of deliberation, a nine-member jury unanimously acquitted Colyn Algreen of engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor of the same sex.

Algreen was initially accused of committing the act after a woman known to him discovered that her son’s anus was torn and bruised after the young boy had gone out with him to get food.

The prosecution’s case relied on the testimonies of 14 witnesses, including the victim’s mother and grandmother.

In her evidence, the boy’s mother told the court she was sitting on the couch on the day in question when Algreen decided to go out to get something to eat from a food truck in the Yamacraw area that was about two minutes away.

The woman said as Algreen was about to go to the door, her then three-year-old son cried to go with him, so she allowed him to tag along.

She said at the time, Algreen asked her if she wanted to come also, but she declined because she was not feeling well.

However, she said when she realised five minutes had gone by, she tried to call Algreen’s phone, but it kept going to voicemail.

The woman said when the accused man arrived home about an hour later, she grabbed her son and carried him inside.

She said when she laid him on a bed and took off his underwear, she saw bruising on his buttocks.

When she took the stand, the three-year-old’s grandmother said when her daughter laid the young boy on her bed that day, she noticed that his rectum was red and torn.

She said when she asked Algreen what happened to her grandson he said: “Nothing.”

She added that when she informed Algreen that the boy was bleeding he replied: “You really think I would hurt him?”

The woman said she later overheard Algreen telling her daughter: “I heard him say his rectum was hurting him (but when I) checked it there was no blood.”

She said this confused her and her daughter because they were wondering why Algreen examined the little boy. She said that that was when he told her daughter that he “put on full stop” and applied brakes which caused the child to fall on his seat belt.

On the advice of his attorney, Algreen chose to remain silent after the close of the prosecution’s case. He also opted not to call on any witnesses to testify on his behalf.

The defence’s case relied on the lack of DNA evidence, eyewitnesses and CCTV footage linking Algreen to the alleged crime.

During her closing submissions, his attorney Miranda Adderley urged the jury to make their decision based on the facts and not on speculation.

She also argued that there were some inconsistencies in several witnesses’ testimonies and contended that the case was filled with “gaps”.

The attorney said an example of this was seen in both the victim’s mother and grandmother’s testimonies during trial.

“When asked to the (mother) was Colyn ever left at home without you being present with your son, at first she said ‘no’ and then she said ‘oh, sometimes when she goes to work, Colyn would be there with him’. When we asked (the grandmother) if Colyn was ever left alone without the mother’s presence, she also said ‘no’ at first and then said ‘yes,’ other persons were home,” she told jurors at the time.

Ms Adderley also explained that officers who testified on the stand confirmed that Algreen cooperated with police and voluntarily assisted with providing DNA samples, which proved he had nothing to hide.

“There were oral swabs collected, rectal swabs, blood samples…over 30 pieces of evidence collected (and) no semen found...If this sexual assault occurred, something should’ve been there.

“...The prosecution failed in their duty. There are no eyewitnesses, no CCTV, no evidence, no DNA to back up their allegations.”