Asylum Seeker participated in gang rape – gets awarded 140,000 (Swedish Crowns) in damages

An original translation by Tania Groth with much thanks

From this Swedish news site

19th October 2016

Asylum Seeker participated in gang rape – gets awarded 140,000 (Swedish Crowns) in damages

One of the African asylum seekers from Eritrea who was present when a woman in Ludvika was brutally gang-raped is now granted 140,000 Swedish kronor in damages from the Swedish taxpayers. This despite the fact that he had participated in the rape and even kissed the woman, reports the Dala-Democrat.

The gang rape took place in central Ludvika at 00.30 o’clock the night of Saturday, 17th of October last year.

The woman was on her way home where when she stopped at the ATM machine at Fredsgatan. At the ATM several African men stopped her and asked her for cigarettes. Upon leaving, one of the Africans followed her to an alley by the restaurant Trädgården where he asked her to give him a kiss.

– No, I have a boyfriend, the woman explained to no avail as the African then shoved his tongue into her mouth.

Two other Africans suddenly appeared and the woman thought they would come to her rescue. Instead, the Africans formed a circle around the woman, pulled down her pantyhose and panties and subjected her to both anal and vaginal rape while the others helped (the rapist) by holding her.

The woman was shocked and screamed for help during the gang rape, which lasted fifteen to twenty minutes. Finally a Swedish man arrived at the scene and asked the Eritreans what they were doing, which led to the Africans scattering in different directions.

When she was found she lay completely battered on the ground without both panty-hose and panties.

“I was in a panic and completely destroyed, the woman told the hearing”.

The district court sentenced each of the three Eritreans to four years in prison, the penalty for aggravated rape. But the Court of Appeal chose to free the Africans because the victim described “one of the men as more passive during the rape,” reports the “Dala-Democrat” and the court decided that therefore, that all three men would be acquitted.

“The Court of Appeal claims that there was no evidence that he had been involved. Nor it is considered proven who did what, even if the Court of Appeal also speculates about it. The conclusion is that no one can be charged,” writes the local newspaper.

And now one of the Africans is awarded damages by the Attorney General, JK. He will receive 140,000 Swedish Crowns for the time he was detained, according to the government decision, the “Dala-Democrat” reports. According to the local newspaper other convicted African rapists, can, given this decision, also sue for damages at the Swedish taxpayers’ expense

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

3 Replies to “Asylum Seeker participated in gang rape – gets awarded 140,000 (Swedish Crowns) in damages”

  1. Makes you cry!

    The Law gone haywire. You know something is wrong with the legal …when common sense is laid aside. Multiculturalism extremism has created fear. Being crazy with legalism has drained the life out of the spirit of the law.

  2. Yesterday you described Sweden and the worlds craziest open air lunatic asylum, this incident shows that the Swedish government is so far gone there is no saving it.

  3. “The district court sentenced each of the three Eritreans to four years in prison, the penalty for aggravated rape. But the Court of Appeal chose to free the Africans because the victim described “one of the men as more passive during the rape,” reports the “Dala-Democrat” and the court decided that therefore, that all three men would be acquitted.”

    If this is a true report, then I can only summize the three senior judges argued, “which one was passive?”
    And read that the raped-woman had said, “they look all the same to me.”
    And the Judges concluded, “then that wouldn’t be fair to send the wrong man to jail would it.” So they were all set free and the one detained, compensated.

    Outside, the original prosecuting lawyer hearing of the decision rushed to a departing judge. “But the ‘passive one’ was an accessory to the crime – by not defending her!”
    And the judge replied, “but we don’t know that, he could have been scared; and in addition to this, each other person present could say that they were the ‘passive ones’, and so we have to have had proof.”
    “So you are saying if you go out to gang rape, all one has to do is dress alike and sound alike and just have only one person who is passive?”
    “It could be one or a crowd of fifty by-standers. Without penetrative DNA, scratches or clear recognition from an identity parade; and then the fact if anyone else was present, even a voyeur, who they could not isolate from the miscreants will means that those were actual-guilty of rape could not be determined… and with no proof beyond reasonable doubt, no sentence. The law is the law.”

    The prosecuter looked dejected. “But the ‘passive one’ could have told us the truth…”
    “And the other two would say they too were that innocent one…”
    “We are screwed as a country.”
    “No, not at all. The laws we have are descended from the determination of reasonable doubt. So let’s say they were three very good friends. Now, if suddenly as an onlooker, two buddies raped someone, wouldn’t he tell the police of his disgust and horror, wouldn’t he stop associating with them? And so wouldn’t his police testimony have come out in the court, to have been made very much earlier than the race-bait lawyers coached Clinton-lies from each and evey one of them? Therefore, where was this evidence?”
    “So by this you would determine if they were all guilty or not?”
    “I now will never know; precicely because this testimony wasn’t brought to the jury, when it should have been. if it had, then either way it would be obvious to know if the third man was guilty. But you didn’t. I am a judge, I wear a wig charged to review only what was presented in that court. You are a weak prosecutor, and by extension a poor human-being because simple logic escapes you. YOU are the destructors of our future, not the courts you inherrited from your forefathers.”
    “Why do have it in for ME?”
    “Because I am always presented with the same “passive observers” among the guilty.” He paused and looked warily around for anyone to overhear. “My robes are off;” he murmered, “and am now a citizen. The Muslims stand side by side with the Muhammadans. Those who look on, and those who kill. That Socialism has made you a dullard to uncover the guilty, with the full force of the law at your disposal, disgusts me. We cannot in this case advance your incompetence for you – for that would be the justice of Shariah.. We can only do our jobs properly. You should have attended to yours. Be off imbecile!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.