Published: 26 Mar 12 08:42 CET | Print version
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/39886/20120326/
The frequency of rape case acquittals in Sweden has increased dramatically in recent years, new research has shown, and scholars have a theory as to what lay behind the trend.
What do you think? Leave your comment below.
Youths rioted in northern Stockholm on Sunday night, setting fire to cars and throwing rocks at police, in what is believed to be a protest against the fatal police shooting of a machete-wielding man in the suburb last week. READ () »
With two weeks of Euromania done and dusted and with southern Sweden nursing a Eurovision-sized hangover, The Local's Patrick Reilly takes one last look at the highlights, the lowlights, and Malmö's time in the limelight. READ () »
Sweden's ice hockey team won the gold-medal match in the ice hockey World Championships against Switzerland on Sunday night, trouncing the visitors 5-1. READ () »
The Swedish royal family gathered in the Royal Chapel in Stockholm on Sunday for the publication of the banns of marriage ahead of the wedding of Princess Madeleine and her fiancé Christopher O'Neill. READ () »
Sweden's Green Party is on the rise while support for the Christian Democrats is at the lowest in nearly a decade, according to the latest voter poll. READ () »
A man was detained Sunday morning on suspicion of involvement in a violent jewellery store heist which left three people with gunshot wounds. READ () »
A fire that started on Friday afternoon in a peat bog in southern Sweden has closed down highway traffic and could take weeks to put out, according to local rescue services. READ () »
Emmelie De Forest of Denmark takes over from Sweden's Loreen as the Eurovision Song Contest champion, capping a spectacle that kept Malmö and the rest of Europe cheering on Saturday night. READ () »
More news from Germany at thelocal.de
More news from France at thelocal.fr
More news from Norway at thelocal.no
More news from Switzerland at thelocal.ch
Register now for:
> Free use of noticeboard
> Special discounts
> Weekly news roundup
> Unlimited use of discuss
Be British, be sincere and be bold »
"Sweden is a veritable smorgåsbord for UK business. I see our work as a bit like a kind of dragon’s den for both for larger and smaller British companies. It is about matching the UK companies, not with cash, but with Swedish market opportunities." READ »
Your comments about this article:
The comments below have not been moderated in advance and are not produced by The Local unless clearly stated. Readers are responsible for the content of their own comments. Comments that breach our terms and conditions will be removed.
Poor, poor Assange. They don't want to let him get away with rape so the world must be picking on him. Stig Larssen was right about Men Who Hate Women. Doesn't it bother anyone that there are so many accusations and so few charges, let alone the glaring difference in the number of acquittals? Apparently, rape is not punishable in Sweden unless the rapist takes time to gather a crowd of witnesses. One would suspect that part of the problem of inadequate policing in Sweden is the knowledge on the part of the police that the judicial system will put criminals back on the street without adequate (or any) punishment. The good old boy system doesn't want to make good fellows like Julian Assange suffer just because the woman didn't want to have sex with him.
With these odds, Assange has very little to worry about. But I agree that his particular case does not appear to match the usual criteria for rape.
Having said that, it is difficult to imagine that the 49 out of 50 rapists who see no jail time all fall into the Assange category.
Some how Sweden has an incredibly low prosecution and conviction rate for rape, but even so, has the the highest number of rapes per capita in the EU. Either there are rapes i(in the proper meaning of the word) behind every bush, ever other day in Sweden, or there is something extremely wrong with the Swedish definition of rape, and the way the police and courts process sexual offences.
I have an alternative reason to why the conviction rate is so low: because of political pressure, prosecutors take to court cases that are impossible to win - the accused cannot be safely convicted based on current law.
If a woman is forced to have sex, I believe the Swedish system effectively redresses the violation.
It will take alot to prove that the husband really raped her or maybe she was trying to pay him back for something. Turning love to perfect hatred. hmmm
not only will they be charged but the rapist will go to jail for 20 years instead of just 3.
If the comments on this web site are any indication of public opinion, a widespread education campaign about the crime of rape (e.g. its definition, causes and consequences) is desperately needed.
Rape is forceful penetration against the will of the woman. But the woman will pay her transport to the mans place take off her dress and later on call the police. The girl will invite the man at 12 mid night and call the police at 2 pm what a strange world. And with the huge sex appetite of swedish women, I need to see that husband that will have the Energy satisfy a woman and still force her to get more.
In other news convicted rapists around the world move to sweden.
How sad for a country that boasts progressiveness and human rights cannot even get something simple like rapists convicted. Disgusting!!!!
'No-means-No' was used to lock up Mike Tyson for years even though the beauty contestant had followed him back to his hotel room, because there were bruises etc... to confirm a struggle.
In cases where there is no clear evidence of physical trauma, or where one accuses the other of requesting very rough sex, and where the accused and victim are known to each other, and there are no witnesses of the actual rape, maybe the only way to clarify guilt vs innocence is with a polygraph test, which, if both parties claim they are telling the truth, both should be willing to take.
This would require that state-of-the-art polygraph testing be ahead of most people's lie-telling techniques, or their ability to train in lie telling before the test is administered. If both appear to be telling the truth from the test then it would be clear that at least one is a skillful liar, and the results of the test would need to be thrown out as evidence. But hopefully this would only occur in a small minority of cases.
Anyway a by-product of the Assange case is that a crystal clear definition of rape in Sweden (however ridiculous the rules of rape might appear to be to some people) will have been fully broadcast to visitors and residents alike. If the Assange team argues that the definiton is ridiculously inclusive ('far too many things can be labelled rape') then maybe they can take this all the way to the Swedish or EU supreme court, if their funding or pro-bono legal resources enables that.
"Under Swedish law, there are legal gradations of the definition of rape.
There is the most serious kind, involving major violence.
But below that there is the concept of 'regular rape', still involving violence but not violence of the utmost horror.
And below that there is the idea of 'unlawful coercion'. Talking generally, and not about the Assange case, this might involve putting emotional pressure on someone.
The three categories involve prison sentences of 10, six and four years respectively."
For those commenting here who have their own personal definitions of rape, it might be well to remember that the article is about the legal process and how well or badly it is working in this case.
@#16: I agree it's hard to make an assessment of the severity of the situation without knowing if there is an equivalent statistical increase in the number of reported rapes, but even if there were, that wouldn't necessarily give us a clue of the proportion of fake assertions of rape, or within that the proportion of deliberately fake accusations. I personally have no clear idea of what could constitute "unlawful coercion", but it seems to cover a multitude of sins, and more interestingly to imply the idea of lawful coercion, as in something like:
"...Your honour, I maintain that I lawfully coerced my wife into having sex with me by telling her I would never allow my mother-in-law to visit again unless she did it..." The mind boggles.
@18: totally agree with your comment about the beneficial by-product of the Assange case. What's obviously needed to help both the courts and the victims is a less wishy-washy definition of the crime, not to mention a healthy dose of education for the sexually active population.
The majority of this little micro segment of Joe Public clearly has no clue of the legal definition of rape, so theoretically any of us could be unknowingly perpetrators or victims.
He offered to be questioned in the UK, but that was not acceptable to the Swedish government.
It is becoming more and more clear that the Assange case is all about politics and about trying to intimidate a whistle-blower. No good deed goes unpunished and Sweden will clearly be seen by the world for "rigging" its judicial system for political purpose. The result is likely that Swedish laws will become the laughing stock of the EU.
As has been said, Sweden really needs to review and reform its justice system. The people need to demand change.
"rape case acquittals in Sweden have increased dramatically"
That can only mean that the number of rapes have increased dramatically.
We all know why of course but in Sweden it is not policor to say so.
So why don't you Swedes do what you do best.
Sweep the whole sorry mess under the carpet and go back to sleep.
I do not want to downplay the seriousness of rape as a crime that victimizes women, but the 3rd category that you have quoted from the BBC, which can result in up to 4 years of jail time, is, if accurate, utterly ridiculous:
"....Talking generally, and not about the Assange case, this might involve putting emotional pressure on someone."
What ever happened to the responsibility that a woman has to simply dump a guy (even if it is her husband or sambo) if he ever puts emotional pressure on her to have sex? The Swedish system will ensure that this woman (and her children, if she has any) will not starve or freeze to death if she separates from her partner.
Again, not to downplay the severity of conventional rape, but the third category makes about as much sense as locking up the waiter at a fancy restaurant for 4 years if his top recommendation arrives from the kitchen overcooked.
One avenue of appeal that I have not heard anything about would be the Australian embassy. In the same way that the Swedish embassy will intervene if a Swedish national is sentenced to 500 lashes for insulting the relatives of Mohammed, the Australian embassy should intervene if Assange is asked to serve 4 years for what turns out to have been consensual sex with a woman who later decided that she was not impressed that he had another fling on the same trip to Stockholm.
I agree that the third category is too broad to be understandable - that was my main point. Since the first two categories explicitly refer to physical violence, there does however need to be a definition of rape where a person forces another person to have sex with them without using violence. To me it's possible to distinguish "force" or "coercion" from "persuasion", and given the legal profession's job is to make such precise distinctions, you'd expect there might be clearer guidance here.
But I do think there's a difference between a risk of being served overcooked food, and a risk of emotional damage to another person... I'm sorry, but that particular parallel does downplay the severity of "conventional" rape.
My point about the waiter is that the 3rd rape category does NOT fall into the category of conventional rape.
Still with the 3rd category, a person should recognize if she is being coerced into having sex by some sort of emotional blackmail, and should then take it upon herself to express and excersize her right to NOT have sex, and to promptly end the relationship. Most breakups are not emotionallly agreeable, but a breakup is preferrable to emotional damage that she may inflict upon herself by having sex when she does not want to.
Granted that if the guy is a jerk, the situation may then escalate to one of the 1st two rape categories, which deserves severe punishment, but the 3rd category (at least as expressed in the BBC article you quote) remains in the category of emotional 'dirty laundry' that surrounds the end of many relationships.
The government should not wade into the conventional relationship termination business particularly if it empowers one partner to claim emotional blackmail as a mechanism to cause 4 years of jail time for the other party.
Conventional rape is a whole other category which I never intended to trivialize.
He will barely have left the plane from London to Arlanda before he is marched up the ramp onto a white 737 with no markings, bound for Washington.
Sweden is frit of the Yanks.
Why are you the self-appointed arbiter of what "conventional" rape is. There is no such thing. The third category is not described as "emotional pressure" but as "unlawful coercion" in the BBC article. That category covers all rapes other than where violence is used as the coercive tactic, and the BBC suggest that therefore it might also cover "emotional pressure".
You seem to be making an assumption that "conventional" rape = violent rape as defined by the first two categories. If a women is coerced into having sex with someone because she feels she may be harmed (physically, emotionally) if she does not comply, then this is defined as rape by the majority of the western world, including Sweden, regardless of whether any violence actually takes place.
It might interest you to know that the proportion of rapes where violence does take place is higher in instances where the perpetrator and victim are either a couple or an ex-couple. For stranger-perpetrated rape, violence occurs in about 25% of cases. It might also interest you to know that one standard piece of advice to women if they find themselves in a situation where they think they are about to be raped is to clearly say no, but not to attempt to struggle or fight. One of the reasons for this is that it's better to be *just* raped than raped and wounded, or raped and killed.
The threat of violence is not traditional breakup territory, as would be cases that involve a teacher or coach and teenaged (or younger) students or athletes even if there is no threat of violence, and I agree these could easily deserve 4 or 6 years in prison. I did not equate 'putting emotional pressure on someone' (BBC) with 'the threat of violence' (your words). Threats of violence are like kidnapping, which are serious offences even if violence does not occur.
My point is that the law should NOT be pulled into is post-breakup revenge scenarios. Web-archive was used to reveal that one of the Assange accusers had posted on myspace or facebook a recipe on how to get back at ex boyfriends, which included reporting them for rape. She spoke to the other girl who had had a fling with Assange and then they both went to the police to report 'rape'. This sounds more like a desire for emotional revenge on a two-timing guy than rape, and should not result in 4 years of jail time, if there was no real emotional harm other than the ages-old lesson that some guys are two-timers.
The annecdote you wrote makes no sense. No authority would ever advise anyone to report rape and to accuse a particular individual of that rape (with all the criminal implications of that accusation) simply to get a free HIV test.
There cetainly were discussions with the police, but from what I read the accuser who had posted 'revenge advice' on her website on how to get back at ex-boyrfriends was well informed on how to take a complaint to the police, in a way to make it fall under the ultra broad definiton of rape to the Swedish system.
She then informed the other girl on how to do this, and the other girl also spoke to the police, and so there were soon two 'rape' charges against Assange in a matter of hours.
She got annoyed with Assange for sleeping around (maybe she thought he 'would change for her' but he did not).