A Pembroke man faces up to 20 years in jail after being found guilty of rape yesterday in Supreme Court.

Albert Antonio Wolffe, 42, was convicted of sexual assault by ten of 12 jury members but was found not guilty of stealing the victim?s knapsack.

The incident took place on or about January 1, 2001. The victim was found around 2 a.m. wandering down Dundonald Street with no pants on after celebrating New Year?s Eve at Blue Juice Bar, Hamilton. She was taken to Hamilton Police Station by a good Samaritan and described by Police to be ?disorientated? and ?hysterical?.

In her earlier testimony she told the court that she did not remember anything of the evening after being at Blue Juice for a few hours and consuming just three alcoholic drinks. She said her memory did not return until the next day. She was taken to the hospital around 4 a.m. to have a sex assault examination done by Dr. Basil Wilson.

Samples of her blood and urine were taken, along with a vaginal and rectal swab. The semen found in her matched Wolffe?s DNA.

?I really believe I was drugged by a date rape drug but it was not found in my blood because it was tested too late. The drug leaves your body after a few hours,? said the victim, who is from France but did not wish to be named.

According to a website on Rohypnol, a date rape drug, it takes about ten minutes for it to take effect, creating loss of inhibition, extreme sleepiness, relaxation and memory loss. It is effective in any drink and works its way out of the human body within 24 hours. The victim told the Court in her earlier testimony: ?After I had a glass of champagne, ten minutes later I do not remember anything until the next day.?

Government analyst and toxicologist Christine Quigley told the court in earlier proceedings that she took a blood sample at 6.20 a.m. and it read 195 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.

She estimated that at midnight the victim would have had about 290 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood ? three-and-a-half times over the legal driving limit. Ms Quigley said the victim would have been experiencing nausea, gross impairment, loss of memory, mental confusion, vomiting, and difficulty speaking and walking. She also stated that she found no drugs in the victim.

Wolffe said he did not notice any of these symptoms when with the victim but recognised she ?had a few drinks?.

He was caught lying on the stand about numerous details of the case. His Police statement was inconsistent with his testimony during the trial.

The Prosecution?s main argument was that Wolffe raped the victim when she was unconscious. He told the court that he thought she consented by pulling her pants down and telling him she ?wanted to have some fun?.

The jury began its deliberation at 11:47 a.m. and came back in at 2:30 p.m. to tell Chief Justice Richard Ground that they were unable to come close to a majority on a verdict for the charge of sexual assault.

At this time they also stated that they unanimously found Wolffe not guilty of stealing the victim?s knapsack.

Mr. Justice Ground told the members of the jury: ?I must ask you to keep trying until you reach a majority or decide you are hung.?

The jury left the courtroom again and came back within an hour to lay down their guilty verdict.

Defence lawyer Ed Bailey was standing in for Larry Scott and told the court he was not in a position to proceed for sentencing.

Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Kulandra Ratneser revealed to the court that Wolffe had previous convictions that were never brought up during the trial because the DPP was ?not briefed on it?.

?He has two convictions for assault, one for drug possession and one for stalking,? said Mr. Ratneser. He suggested remanding Wolffe until sentencing on the basis of his prior convictions.

During the trial Wolffe lied on the stand, telling the jury he had no prior convictions.

The prosecution are only allowed to bring previous convictions up if the defendant makes their character an issue.

Asked about the slip Mr. Ratneser said the Police and his office were responsible for briefing him on previous convictions.

He told : ?I don?t want to point the finger at anybody, there was an oversight.?

He then indicated his office should have told him. Asked if it was crucial given the knife-edge verdict he said: ?It could have been quite crucial.?

It was also brought to the court?s attention by the Crown that Wolffe fled to the United States and did not answer to bail after he was charged with sexual assault and DNA results pointed the finger at him for rape.

Wolffe was found in New York and deported back to Bermuda.

In Mr. Ratneser?s argument to lock Wolffe up until sentencing, he also made the point that the victim is still in the jurisdiction.

Mr. Bailey said: ?The drug possession charge was almost ten years ago and he has not had any since. Also the assault charged dates back to 1999 and it arose from a domestic dispute ? it was nothing of a sexual nature.?

Mr. Justice Ground replied: ?Well, he is convicted now, isn?t he??

Mr. Bailey also mentioned that the complainants of the assault charges were Wolffe?s wife and her boyfriend.

Sentencing was adjourned until a date to be fixed by the registrar and Mr. Justice Ground remanded Wolffe in custody.