Posted on 07/06/2012 9:24:26 AM PDT by nickcarraway
A man who attempted to rape a woman has been cleared of the charges by a Swedish court after it turned out that the woman he tried to rape was biologically a man.
“The intended crime never had the possibility of being fulfilled,” explained judge Dan Sjöstedt of the Örebro District Court to local newspaper Nerikes Allehanda.
When the 61-year-old man had tried to commit the rape in Örebro, he had no idea that the intended victim was born a man, and had been taking hormonal treatment to reach the “right” identity, wrote the paper.
After following the woman for some time, the would-be rapist was “brutally violent” in the "attempted rape", tearing off the victim's pants and grabbing at the victim's crotch, according to the paper.
The incident occurred in front of the woman's ex-boyfriend’s house, and it was him who came rushing to intervene. When police arrived, they arrested the attacker.
However, the court has ruled that the 61-year-old had intended to rape a woman, as he had been following her before the attack, making a conscious decision to rape her specifically. The man also referred to his victim as "she" throughout the court case.
As this woman was biologically a man, his intentions were impossible to commit as the rape could never be completed.
“We believe that he wanted to rape this woman in particular. But as she turned out to be a man, the crime never was actually committed,” said Sjöstedt, adding that the case against rape was “invalid”.
"There are different theories about how this should be handled, and so we’re looking forward to seeing the verdict from the Court of Appeals,” he said, adding that he would appeal the decision if he were the prosecutor or the defence.
The 61-year-old is now convicted for assault. The punishment is four years prison and 15,000 kronor ($2,161) in damages to the woman.'
Apparently not...
So, in Sweden it’s perfectly legal for a man to involuntarily sodomize another man?
*****************************************
Guilty, I don't care what kind of freak his targeted victim may have been.
The victim was assaulted with the intention of rape, is that not a crime in Sweden? No wonder Sweden is going down the tubes.
The Judge is dead wrong.
True Story.I was sent to a nightclub in Washington DC for a rape.
The dressing rooms were in the basement: Many girls were there and I went to the one who was raped to attend to her.
It runs out this club was a club for female impersonators. The she was a he who had come into the club through the allet entrance —was met there by a molester and when the molester found he had a male instead of a female he raped the male in his rectum.
To say it is impossible to rape a male dressed as a female is a boatload of horse dung.
Animals who rape, may prefer a woman, but those who have been in prison before take any port in a storm.Many males in Washington DC and other cities. who have been to prison and call themselves straight will force themselves on men in prison and go back to females when they get out.
“... it’s perfectly legal for a man to involuntarily sodomize another man?”
Sounds like it is IF the rapist assumed his victim was female. Makes no sense to me at all. I wonder if in Sweden, a person shoots someone in the head and kills them. Do they get off on the murder charge IF they thought they were murdering Mr. X and “accidentally” murdered Mr. Y?
How could you possibly think that? It’s called assault. It’s illegal.
Did you not read the story? The intent was to rape...by the logic of the court, if the criminal had attacked and sodomized a genetic woman, there would have been no rape.
I personally don’t accept there being a distinction. A sex assault that involves penetration of any kind is “rape” - period - in my book.
Save the males from sexist judges.
You don’t think he would have been charged with rape? That was his intent.
(Or, in the words of his aptly-name sycophant, Whoopie: it wasn't "rape" rape.)
Wait....what? I don’t understand what you’re asking.
If it had been a woman, don’t you think he would have been charged with rape?
You missed the point I was making: he should have been charged with attempted rape, regardless of the gender of his victim.
The court said he couldn’t complete the act of rape because he attacked a transgender....so, what if he had attacked a woman but raped her anally? By the courts logic, that wouldn’t have been a rape.
Furthermore, he may very well have known he was going after a trans and would have raped “her” anally had a 3rd party not stopped the rape. And now, so he could get a lesser charge, he’s lied and said he thought he was attacking a woman.
And still, by the courts logic, had they not been interrupted and he was able to sodomize “her” against her will - that still would not have been rape.
My point is that I don’t believe there’s a distinction to be made: any involuntary penetration against any person of any gender, is rape. Period.
I believe the way the Swedish law code is written, the term rape only applies to a female, so it is impossible to commit to rape on a male. I don’t think it has anything to do with where the penetration takes place.
We can no longer have clarity in news stories with this PC crap. The “woman’s” ex-boyfriend? None of these people is or ever will be a “woman.”
Anyway, must have been a shock when his grope turned into a grab. He shoukd have just said he was pretending to be Crocodile Dundee.
Okay, so we ARE living in the freaking Twilight Zone of liberal insanity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.