Rape.

[TheCross]

Im on my phone, and for some reason i cant copy the link, but i will asap when i come home from work.

There is a case in sweden right now about a woman being raped by two men.
At first these two men were charged and convicted with "grouprape", they later appealed the verdict and won.

Motivation: THEY DID NOT PENETRATE THE WOMANAT THE SAME TIME.

So, technically, a grouprape is not determined by the numbers of men, its the actual number at the same time??

Sweden is going insane, im honestly lost for words.

Discuss please!

[Steve B]

I'm skeptical.  I'd want to read the article first before even commenting.

[TheCross]

http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/brottscentralen/article22444033.ab

If someone could translate this, my phone is going insane!

Its swedish.

[TheCross]

From the article:

The Court of Appeal reduces punishment: " The rape occurred in sequence "
Receive harsh criticism of the legal expert
It was not a gang rape when two men together raped a woman outside Gothenburg in March last year .
The Court of Appeal considers that lower penalty and damages. The reasoning is that the men raped the woman in " turn " which does not make it a gang rape .
- A really bad verdict says right expert Sven-Erik Alhem to Crime Centre

Jesus...

[Steve B]

http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/brottscentralen/article22444033.ab

If someone could translate this, my phone is going insane!

Its swedish.

Google Translation:

It was not a gang rape when two men together raped a woman outside Gothenburg in March last year .
The Court of Appeal considers that lower penalty and damages. The reasoning is that the men raped the woman in " turn " which does not make it a gang rape .

-- A really bad hovrättsdom says right expert Sven-Erik Alhem to Crime Centre.

A 30 -year-old man was convicted in the District Court for aggravated rape after a brutal incident that took place in Gothenburg in March last year . The man had with another - so far unidentified man - met a woman at the restaurant Hard Rock Cafe . When the tavern closed followed the woman with the two men and the evening ended with the woman, who was under the influence of both drugs and alcohol, was raped by the two men at a rest stop south of Gothenburg.
The 30 -year-old man was convicted in the District Court to four and a half years in prison and to pay 180,000 kronor in damages to the woman

lowers penalty

When the Court of Appeal now had the upper case choose to reduce the sentence , and reduce damages , for the man because it does not believe that it was a gang rape , and therefore can not be classed as an aggravated rape .
As justification indicates that the men had sex with the woman at the same time , but that it was in order.
In the judgment the Court of Appeal writes :
 " The plaintiff understanding that X when alone with her ​​and the other man had left the car. The other man then took that moment not in the assault . Neither attended X when the other man had sexual intercourse with the victim . "

"Not rape "

The Court of Appeal considers that the men acted together, such as when they moved the woman from the front seat to the back seat , but they do not help each other so much that it can be classified as a gang rape .
The man's punishment is therefore lowered to three and a half years in prison and damages are reduced to 150 000.

" Insanely "

Now judgment harsh criticism . Sven-Erik Alhem , the right expert and the Crime Victims ' Union , says it is a very bad judgment .
- It is terrible to read that you have a more lenient approach to it in that it was one at a time who performed the abuse, he says to Aftonbladet television program Crime Centre.
He says it 's crazy that the offense is not classed as serious when the two men together, " moved the body ."
- There is a huge violation. I would have sentenced for serious crimes.
See more about the case of Crimes Center.

[Aaron Massey]

Defendants lawyers probably doing the best they can to get a downgraded sentence for there clients...

But at the same time looking repulsive. 

I can actully see the argument the other way, Rape is rape, no matter how many men.  But each man ought be charged and sentenced for rape.   

I dont think defining a sentence based on the numerical is a good way to do it, and that is probably where the problem really lies.

Sometimes, men may not rape because they are a group, and other times only rape because they feel they have to because they are a group.... and then define group also..

Perhaps get rid of the term "gang rape"   and only sentence base on the severity and participation individually is best. 

[Steve B]

It seems to me like a classic "substance vs. form" argument. This is a long standing argument in law.  You want the law to be formative because it makes it seem more fair. . .more standardized. . . more objective in its application.  But this approach also opens up loopholes, and causes the law to lose the substance for its existence in the first place.

I think it was Cicero who said, "The reasons for the law is the substance of the law."

This quote is often lost on people who resort to legal sophistry and loopholing.

[neopolitan]

From Aftonbladet (human translation):

Hovrätten sänker straff: ”Våldtäkten skedde i turordning”
Får hård kritik av rättsexperten

Det var inte en gruppvåldtäkt när två män tillsammans våldtog en kvinna utanför Göteborg i mars förra året.
Det anser hovrätten som sänker straffet och skadeståndet. Motiveringen är att männen våldtog kvinnan i ”tur och ordning” vilket inte gör den till en gruppvåldtäkt.
– En jättedålig hovrättsdom, säger rättsexpert Sven-Erik Alhem till Brottscentralen.
En 30-årig man dömdes i tingsrätten för grov våldtäkt efter en brutal händelse som skedde i Göteborg i mars förra året. Mannen hade tillsammans med en annan – hittills oidentifierad man – träffat en kvinna på krogen Hard Rock café. När krogen stängde följde kvinnan med de båda männen och kvällen slutade med att kvinnan, som var påverkad både av droger och alkohol, våldtogs av de båda männen på en rastplats söder om Göteborg.
Den 30-åriga mannen dömdes i tingsrätten till fyra och ett halvt års fängelse och att betala 180 000 kronor i skadestånd till kvinnan.
Sänker straffet
När hovrätten nu haft uppe fallet väljer man att mildra straffet, och sänka skadeståndet, för mannen eftersom man inte anser att det var en gruppvåldtäkt och därför inte kan klassas som en grov våldtäkt.
Som motivering anger man att männen inte haft sex med kvinnan samtidigt, utan att det skedde i tur och ordning.
I domslutet skriver hovrätten:
 ”Målsäganden uppfattade det som att X då var ensam med henne och att den andre mannen hade lämnat bilen. Den andre mannen deltog alltså just då inte i övergreppet. Inte heller deltog X när den andre mannen hade samlag med målsäganden.”
”Inte gruppvåldtäkt”
Hovrätten anser däremot att männen agerat tillsammans, till exempel när de flyttat kvinnan från framsätet till baksätet, men att de inte hjälp varandra så mycket att det kan klassas som en gruppvåldtäkt.
Mannens straff sänks därför till tre och ett halvt års fängelse och skadeståndet sänks till 150 000 kronor.
”Vansinnigt”
Nu får domen hård kritik. Sven-Erik Alhem, rättsexpert och förbundsordförande i Brottsofferjouren, säger att det är en jättedålig dom.
– Det är fruktansvärt att läsa att man har en lindrigare syn på det i och med att det var en i taget som utförde övergreppen, säger han till Aftonbladets tv-program Brottscentralen.
Han säger att det är vansinnigt att brottet inte klassas som grovt när de båda männen tillsammans ”flyttat kroppen”.
– Det är en jättekränkning. Jag skulle ha dömt för grovt brott.
Se mer om fallet i Brottscentralen.

Court of Appeal reduces sentence:Rapists took turns
Receives strong criticism from rights expert

It was not group rape when two men raped a woman outside Gothenberg in March last year.
This was the consideration of the court of appeal which reduced the sentence and compensation.  The reasoning is that the men raped the woman "in turn" which does not constitute group rape.
"A very bad appeals decision" says rights expert Sven-Erik Alhem to Crime Central.
A 30 year old man was convicted in court for aggravated rape after a brutal incident which took place in Gothenberg in March last year.  The man had together with another, yet to be identified man met a woman at Hard Rock Cafe.  When the pub closed, the woman went with the two men and the evening ended with the woman, who was affected by both drugs and alcohol, was raped by both men at a road-side rest are south of Gothenberg.  The 30 year old man was convicted, receiving a four and a half year prison sentence with 180,000 SEK in damages to be paid to the woman. 

Lower punishment

Now that the court of appeal has reviewed the case, they have chosen to reduce the punishment, and lower the damages, for the man because it cannot be considered that it was a group rape and therefore cannot be classed as an aggravated rape.
The justification was the men did not have sex with the woman simultaneously, rather the rapes took place in sequence.
In the decision, the court of appeal wrote:
"The plaintiff believed that X was alone with her and that the other man had left the car.  The other man did not participate in the assault at that time.  Nor did X participate when the other man had sex with the plaintiff."
"Not group rape."
The court of appeal considers nevertheless that the men acted together, for example when they moved the woman from the frontseat to the backseat but that they did not assist each other to the extent that it could be considered a group rape.
The man's punishment has therefore been lowered to three and a half year's prison and damages were lowered to 150,000 SEK.

"Crazy"

Now the judgment is receiving severe criticism.  Sven-Erik Alhem, rights expert and chairman of Victim's Support, says that it is a very bad judgment.
"It's is awful to read that one considers it a minor thing because they took turns in the assault" he told Aftonbladet's tv-program Crime Central.
He says that it is crazy that the crime isn't classed as aggravated when both men worked together to "move the body".
"It's a huge violation. I would have made it an aggravated crime."

See more about the case in Crime Central.

[neopolitan]

I suggest that you look at the Swedish law about what does and does not constitute group rape and hold all your breathless condemnation until you know the facts.  Rape punishments lie between 2 and 6 years, so the punishment at 4.5 years was towards the high end.  Even 3.5 years is more than the middle range (and I think we'd all agree that if rapes have to happen, we want them to be happening at the lower end of the violation end of things, don't we?  If every rape gets maximally punished, then why not go the whole hog with a victim once you've managed to get drunk and into your backseat?  Go for total humiliation and total destruction of their psyche without actually killing them.  This is part of the reason why it's not sensible to hang people for stealing your handkerchief, they might as well be hung for killing you as taking your poncy little square of silk.)

We know absolutely nothing about the details of the case, which might include some history, some uncertainty as to what precisely went on, and the woman may well have not wanted the punishment that was awarded to the perpetrator.  We simply don't know.  Pretending that it's a black and white case messed up by the serious consideration of the court of appeal who had access to evidence relevant to the case is just ridiculous.

But of course, what use is evidence?  Best to go with your gut and moral outrage, right?

---

Edit: I should avoid giving the impression that the Swedish legal system is perfect.  The court of appeal might well have messed up.  I'm just pointing out that, based on the very small amount of data we have to hand, it's not appropriate to immediately assume that they must have messed up.  It'd be like assuming that something said by Trump is completely crazy, because he's American and he's Trump.  It's possible, right, but not absolutely necessarily the case.

[Nunovalente]

Rape carries a maximum life sentence in the UK. 3.5 years is not enough. The victim has a life sentence. Why shouldn't the perpetrator?

[AnimatedDirt]

Rape carries a maximum life sentence in the UK. 3.5 years is not enough. The victim has a life sentence. Why shouldn't the perpetrator?

The victim of every crime, small or large, has a life sentence as a victim...I'm hardly advocating rape, but this point just seems slightly off to me.