The world was shocked when news surfaced that a migrant raped and impregnated a terrified
11-year-old white girl, who miraculously delivered a healthy baby boy.
However, despite hearing the stomach-churning details of the migrant's child abuse, the
court acquitted him of all charges due to 4 sickening words.
As already diverse Europe attempts to force even more diversity, once progressive nations
are finding that, if given the opportunity, aggressive cultures will eradicate tolerant
ones, destroying their belief that all cultures are created equal.
Unfortunately, instead of thwarting these barbaric civilizations, the superior society
is making excuses for such savagery.
Disturbingly, the European courts are not only offering biased rulings and mild sentences
to those adhering to inhumane cultural principles, they are deliberately allowing the most heinous
offenders to escape justice entirely, believing their mercy will change centuries of ingrained
barbarism.
Of course, they quickly discover that these monsters will once again be dragged back to
the courthouse for the same depraved villainy.
In January 2010, a Cape Verde migrant was tried for the rape of an 11-year-old girl
which led to the young child becoming pregnant.
The 22-year-old African suspect led the child to a secluded area of a park in northeast
France in August 2009 before undressing and penetrating her while she begged him to stop.
Nine months later, the young girl, only identified as Justine, gave birth to a baby boy, who
was subsequently placed with a foster family.
During his hearing, the migrant told the Criminal Trial Court of Seine-et-Marne that the child
was at fault for lying to him about her age, despite the victim's claim that she had
told him she was just 11 years old.
Incredibly, the errant jury found the migrant not guilty of raping the minor child, immediately
acquitting him of all charges, according to Le Parisien.
When reading out the reason for a full acquittal, the court explained that the now 30-year-old
migrant was not at fault and that his actions could not be considered rape because when
he penetrated the child, "there was no coercion" — meaning that he didn't use force when
penetrating the victim.
The migrant was acquitted on November 7 by a jury when they concluded that the child
victim had the burden of fighting her attacker and failed her responsibility to properly
resist his advances.
In short, the jury determined that the child had literally consented to sexual intercourse
with the adult male, although French law explicitly states that the age of consent is 15.
Because of this outrageous ruling, the prosecutor has filed a motion for appeal to drop the
acquittal and call for a minimum prison sentence of 8 years.
"Up to 15 years, a child must be protected.
You cannot obtain sex [in a normal way.]
Her consent is not required," says prosecutor Dominique Laurens.
"My client is traumatized," says the child's lawyer, Me Laure Habeneck.
"It appears from this decision that a sexual relationship between a 22-year-old man and
an 11-year-old girl is now normalized in our society."
Disturbingly, the migrant's attorney, Samir Mbarki, absurdly insists that the intercourse
was consensual and that it was actually the child who coerced the man to carry out a sexual
relationship.
"My client maintained at the hearing that the complainant lied to him about her age.
He says they flirted," said Mbarki, claiming that the child convinced the migrant that
she was "15 to 16 years old."
The case is eerily similar to a recent Finnish trial in which a 23-year-old Muslim asylum
seeker raped a 10-year-old girl but received a reduced sentence of 3 years in prison because
the child did not properly object to the sexual assault.
Aamulehti reports that Juusuf Muhamed Abbud's charges were lessened from rape to sexual
exploitation of a child since the victim failed to deny consent to the rapist.
The judgment rocked headlines when the Pirkanmaan District Court stated that, due to the child's
contradictory statements, she was unable to prove that she had sexual intercourse against
her will.
The court added that because Abbud did not have to use forceful tactics to carry out
sexual intercourse with the child, it could not be considered rape since rape is defined
as forcible sexual penetration by use of violence or threats of violence.
According to the second moment, rape is also condemned if the act is made "by exploiting
the fact that the other is unable to defend himself or to form or to express his will
by exploiting the other due to uncontrollability, illness, disability, fear or other helpless
state."
Professor of Criminal Law Matti Tolvanen explained that it could be considered that the physical
superiority of an adult male against a female child is violence itself.
Still, the court refused to consider that a 10-year-old child does not have the mental
capacity, understanding, or legal ability to consent.
Unbelievably, the Turku Court of Appeals also rejected the child victim's accusation of
aggravated rape, implying that the girl did not provide sufficient evidence that she was
forced into sex against her will.
The sexual assaults apparently took place between September and October 2016, meaning
that the child predator could be out on the streets again in a matter of months if he
obtains early release with good behavior.
Thanks to liberal policies, Europe is submitting to barbarity in the name of diversity.
Of course, this only leads to the most savage of cultures gaining a foothold in a battle
that will forever change the face of the West.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét