Here is a new one. A man accused of raping several boys claims that he is innocent because he is impotent:
Neurologist, Dr.Walter Ramsahoye on Wednesday rejected allegations against Muslim Scholar, Neziaam Ali that he sexually molested several boys because he is impotent.
Ramsahoye, who examined the man and perused his medical records, said it would be improper for him to divulge the “multiplicity of illnesses” that afflict the man said to be in his 30s. The doctor, however, insisted that the man could not have committed the acts for which he the Mufti has been accused. […] “To say that he committed those acts is akin to saying that an individual without arms could use a cutlass to attack policemen,” said Ramsahoye in a letter to the media. ““I wish to state publicly that the Muslim Scholar is totally and absolutely innocent and there is no one who can challenge that statement,” he added.
Now, it is possible that Ali is impotent and therefore could not have raped anyone. However, the medical evidence shows that the boys had been anally raped. Of course, a person need not use a penis to rape someone. It is possible to rape someone with an object or a hand. It is possible that Ali may generally be impotent but can sometimes get erections. It is also possible that someone else assaulted the boys.
However, only Ali is charged and at the moment the evidence does not help his case. Saying that he is impotent does not help much because it is not just one boy who says he abused him. Those multiple accounts bring into question his claim of impotent.
Nevertheless, this is the first time I have heard of someone claiming they could not have committed rape because they could not get an erection.