Roger Lightbourne hugged his brother and a close friend yesterday after the prosecution's case against him unravelled because the complainant refused to testify.

Lightbourne, of Devonshire, was accused of inflicting grievous bodily harm on Kylah Stowe while depriving her of her liberty on December 17.

But a tearful Ms Stowe, the stitches under her chin and on the side of her swollen face clearly visible as she stood in the witness box, was adamant that she did not want to give evidence.

"I did not want to make a complaint,'' she told the court. "I told the Police I did not want to testify against Roger Lightbourne.

"They have already taken a statement. I don't want to be here.'' Prosecutor Insp. Kenrick James tried to find out why Stowe did not wish to testify but Lightbourne's lawyer Archie Warner objected on the grounds that legal procedure does not permit this.

"There are set rules by which evidence in chief can be led,'' he argued.

"The prosecution cannot treat the witness this way. She has said what she said and he cannot then cross-examine her.'' However Insp. James continued to press the complainant for an explanation but Mr. Warner interjected once again.

"It's none of his business why she does not want to testify.'' While the advocates argued before the bench, Ms Stowe sat on a seat in the witness box, eyes trained on the floor and began to sob.

"I don't want to testify. I just want to go,'' she continued. "I don't want to be here. I made that quite clear to the Police that I did not want to be here.'' Insp. James then tried to get Ms Stowe to tell the court what she told the Police but Mr. Warner rose to say that such conversations would be inadmissible.

"All the evidence must come directly from the complainant. If the evidence does not come from her then as far as we are concerned it is simple. No complainant. No case.'' Mr. King added: "Insp. James, if you find yourself between a rock and a hard place you have to decide whether you are going to use dynamite or stand up on top of the rock.'' In the end Insp James closed the prosecution's case.

Mr. King then made a formal finding of not guilty and discharged Lightbourne because the prosecution had tendered no evidence which implicated the defendant of either charge.