The Vaasa Court of Appeal changed the district court’s verdict and sentenced a 21-year-old man to conditional imprisonment for rape. The district court had previously rejected the rape charge and caused consternation with the reasons for its verdict.
Court of Appeal has changed the district court’s verdict in a highly publicized case where the rape charge was dismissed in the courts because the victim later participated in the shooting of the TV series.
In May, the District Court of Central Finland dismissed the rape charge with the votes of two board members, against the opinion of a professional judge.
The district court partially justified the acquittal at that time by the fact that the person concerned participated in the filming of the television series some time after the incident.
The district judge who lost the vote evaluated the evidence differently. He would have sentenced a man to two years of unconditional imprisonment for raping a woman.
Vaasa the court of appeal changed the district court’s decision and sentenced a 21-year-old man to one year and ten months’ probation for rape.
The rape took place in central Finland in the fall of 2021.
The man was ordered to pay the victim a total of 5,500 euros in compensation for suffering, pain and suffering, as well as temporary inconvenience.
In addition, the man was obliged to compensate the victim for medical and medical expenses of 258 euros.
The Court of Appeal gave its verdict in the case on Friday. The Court of Appeal’s decision and reasons are otherwise secret, but the judgment in the case is public.
The reasons for the verdict are not known, as the Court of Appeal has not issued a public statement on the matter so far.
Accusation according to the man forced the woman to have sex.
According to the man, the sex would have been consensual and at the initiative of the person concerned. The victim, on the other hand, said that she tried to deny the man, after that she became paralyzed and the man directed violence at her.
In the courts, witnesses spoke on behalf of the victim’s story, to whom the victim had called after the incident at night and said that she had been raped. In addition, the doctor’s report revealed that the victim had physical injuries, for example on the neck and numbness in different parts of the body, and according to the doctor, the injuries could have been caused by rape.
In its decision, the district court considered that the accounts of both parties were credible and detailed.
The district court’s most unusual conclusion regarding the evaluation of the screen was related to the filming of a television program in which the victim had participated some time after the incident.
“According to general life experience, a rape victim is unable to participate in such a thing after a few months. Based on these grounds, the district court considers that there is reasonable doubt about the defendant’s guilt,” the district court considered in its reasons.
MIDDLE FINLAND the grounds of the district court’s acquittal of rape verdict in the spring aroused astonishment among legal scholars, among others.
For example, a docent of forensic psychology Julia Korkman described the court’s reasoning in the HS case as “absolutely incomprehensible”.
In Korkman’s opinion, the reasons for the acquittal were an example of the fact that people often mistakenly assume that victims of crimes behave in a certain way.
In reality, according to Korkman, people can behave in very different ways after a traumatic experience.
“If a person participates in anything a few months after the suspected crime, then such conclusions cannot be drawn,” Korkman said at the time in an interview with HS.
Korkman saw that the verdict also raised questions about the necessity and functionality of the lay judge system.
Lautamiehet are lay members of the court appointed by the municipal councils, who are not required to have a legal education.
#Rape #court #changed #verdict #man #convicted #rape #victim #participated #filming #series
