A Supreme Court jury heard yesterday that the enraged father of a rape and battery victim chased down her accused rapist in the street and attempted to make a citizen?s arrest after seeing what the man had done to his daughter.

The defendant in the case ? a 30-year-old Jamaican man who cannot be named for legal reasons ? denies two sets of charges of serious sexual assault and wounding as well as breaking and entering and intimidating a witness in relation to two alleged attacks on his ex-girlfriend in February and May of 2003.

Both of the alleged victim?s parents testified yesterday in Supreme Court with her mother saying the defendant told her his actions were affected by an Obeah ? a form of Jamaican voodoo ? curse on him and her father admitting that he hunted the man down after the second attack when he became aware of what had happened.

?I felt that I failed to protect my daughter and I wanted him to know that under no circumstances would I allow him to hurt and rape my daughter again,? the victim?s father said yesterday.

Prosecutor Oonagh Vaucrosson began the examination of the victim?s mother by asking how she had felt about the defendant dating her daughter.

The victim?s mother said she wasn?t pleased about it in the beginning but as she got to know him the relationship was okay.

The mother also spoke of seeing her daughter at her apartment on the morning after the first attack.

?I walked in and my daughter looked like a beat up rag doll,? she said.

There were bruises all over the 24-year-old victim?s body ? neck, arms, legs, back and breasts ? and she was missing hair.

Ms Vaucrosson asked the witness if she saw the defendant after the alleged attack and the mother replied that defendant rode up on a bike when she was in the driveway a few months later.

She told him that her daughter was going to drop the charges against him.

The defendant told her that if her daughter dropped the charges he would go back to Jamaica to get the Obeah off of him that his friend had cast upon him.

The mother told the jury that she asked the defendant whether he would want anyone to harm his daughter in Jamaica the way he had harmed her daughter. The defendant said no and kept talking about the Obeah that was on him.

The mother said that she didn?t see or speak to the defendant until the day her daughter dropped the charges. After the second attack she said she spoke to the defendant on her other daughter?s cell phone.

She told him that it was too late to go back to Jamaica to get the Obeah off.

?I told him that if this ever happened again I would be picking up my murdered child,? she said.

Defence lawyer Shade Subair asked the witness why she didn?t call the Police when she saw the defendant on her property. ?It was just me, why would I call the Police,? she replied.

She also said that she wasn?t afraid that her daughter?s rapist was on her property because she was in her car.

Ms Subair asked her is she was concerned that the defendant was aggravated by the Obeah. She replied that she doesn?t know what Obeah is, is not interested in it and that it is the defendant?s problem.

The witness told the court that the defendant got along well with all her family before she witnessed him beating her daughter with a machete in front of his son and their family.

The court heard earlier that after this incident, which predated the rapes, the victim?s parents had her take out a protection order against the defendant.

Coming to the witness box next, the victim?s father said he had been introduced to the defendant some years back.

?Truthfully, there was something about him from the very beginning,? he said.

Ms Vaucrosson asked him how he felt about his daughter?s relationship with the defendant.

?I let my children, when they get to a certain age, make their own decisions,? he said. ?I wasn?t comfortable with the relationship but, that?s what she wanted.?

He told the court that he saw his daughter the morning after the second attack at her workplace.

He said his daughter was crying, bleeding and bruised. The father said he was furious and went to find the defendant.

When he was at the Paget stoplights he saw the Police, so he turned around and followed them.

He saw his daughter in the backseat of the Police car but then left to go find the defendant.

The father then spotted the defendant crossing the street in Warwick and literally jumped off his bike and onto him. He said the defendant said he was sorry and that felt that he was going ?to die today?.

The witness said they both fell to the ground and he suffered a blow to the head from hitting the pavement but wouldn?t let the defendant go.

He said that a Policewoman came and asked him if he was attempting to make a citizen?s arrest. He told the woman yes.

The witness said he let the defendant go but he ran when the Police tried to arrest him.

Ms Subair suggested that the defendant was running away from the victim?s father.

?I don?t know what he was thinking,? he said. ?He wasn?t running from me, he was running from the truth.?

The next witness to take the stand was Jewel Alex Hayward, a crime scene investigator who took a series of photographs of the victim after the first attack.

The images were shown to the jury on a projector screen by Ms Vaucrosson. The images included detailed pictures of the victim?s injuries.

There were also pictures of the knife used to attack the victim, of blood on the ground and mattress, of the wrench also used in the attack, and of the bra and underpants the victim had on during the attack and the broken cellular phone.

The pictures of the victim?s injuries included bruises on her arms, upper left shoulder, right breast, back, right leg and knee.

The photographs of the second attack were taken by Det. Con. Eric Malcolm Woods. He said he took pictures on the morning of the second attack at the victim?s apartment and at the hospital.

He also took exhibits from the apartment ? such as the two-pronged knife the defendant allegedly used to slashed the victim.

The victim took the stand again to explain what she saw in the photographs. When shown the undergarments she said the defendant used the bra to wipe up his semen.

Ms Subair suggested that the marks on the victim?s neck in one of the photographs looked like hickeys or love bites.

?I didn?t want a hickey, a cut, a bruise or to be raped,? the victim replied angrily.

Ms Subair proceeded to ask her about the bruises on her body.

?Is it that the defendant caused these injuries or did you cause them yourself?? she asked.

The victim replied, with a look of disgust on her face, that the defendant caused the injuries.

The trial continues today in Supreme Court.