CALUM Best has been acquitted of sexually assaulting a British holidaymaker at Wayne Lineker’s Ibiza beach club.
The judges ruled that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Best forced the tourist’s hand down his shorts to touch his penis.
The son of legendary footballer George Best and a well-known reality TV star in his own right, Best, 42, was tried in Mallorca and faced a possible three-year prison sentence if convicted.
The decision came just eight days after the one-day trial at a Palma court, where Best maintained his innocence and determination to ‘clear his name.’
The court found that the testimony of Best’s female accuser alone was insufficient to overturn the presumption of innocence.
The judges commented on the lack of corroboration for her claims, specifically questioning why the prosecution had not called key witnesses, like the woman’s friend and a security guard, to testify.
Calum Best, now based in the UK and chairman of Dorking Wanderers FC women’s team, did not immediately respond to the acquittal.
His lawyer, Jaime Campaner, said: “I am very satisfied with the result.”
The accuser had claimed that Best had told her, ‘I’ve got something for you, close your eyes’ and forced her right hand down his trousers.
The accuser said: “I remember crying and having a panic attack and going to speak to the security guard immediately afterwards.”
Best was arrested shortly after and held in custody for about a day. The reality TV star blamed the incident on the woman’s drunken state.
The incident, which left her in ‘shock and tears,’ occurred on April 22, 2022, at O Beach club in San Antonio, Ibiza.
In their ruling, the judges highlighted the absence of evidence supporting the tourist’s version of events, including the lack of witness testimonies and inconclusive CCTV footage.
They said in their six-page written ruling: “There is no other information from external sources of evidence that supports the complainant’s testimony, and the court finds it relevant that her friend, who was with her in the initial moments of the first contact with the accused and is said to have accompanied her to see a security guard, did not appear at trial.
“The security guard has not been cited as a witness either.
“The friend was identified in the police report and the security guard would have been easily identifiable.
“When evidence is available that could have been used to support a testimony and it is not used in court without justifying the impossibility of doing so, a situation of objective doubt is created.”
They concluded: “In this case, the prosecution’s evidence has not been sufficient to undermine the right to the presumption of innocence.”
READ MORE:
