Posted on Oct 24, 2016
Verdict on swimming pool rape case overturned
5.78K
54
39
10
10
0
An Iraqi refugee who was jailed after claiming it was a sexual emergency when he raped a boy in a swimming pool has had the sentence overturned.
An appeal court accepted the defence lawyer’s claim that the lower court had not done enough to ascertain whether or not the rapist had realised the schoolboy was saying no.
The attacker, identified as 20-year-old Iraqi migrant Amir A., had been treated to a trip to the Theresienbad pool in December 2015 as part of the integration process.
He had also been provided with a 15-year-old helper and translator who was supposedly teaching him how to integrate into life in Vienna.
At the pool, Amir A. dragged the schoolboy, aged ten, into the changing rooms where he locked the door and violently sexually assaulted him, leaving him in need of urgent treatment at a local children's hospital. The boy is still plagued by massive post-traumatic stress disorder.
The boy, known only as Goran, grew up in Austria with his Serbian mother.
After the rape, Amir A. went back to the swimming pool and was enjoying himself on the diving board when police turned up.
The ten-year-old had told a lifeguard he had been attacked, and he informed the police.
Amir A., who had worked in Iraq as a taxi driver, was still clothed in swimwear when handcuffed. He confessed to the rape, saying he knew it was wrong but did it anyway because it was a "sexual emergency" as he did not had sex for four months.
He was found guilty of serious sexual assault and rape of a minor and was sentenced to six years in jail. Yet in a bizarre twist, the Supreme Court lifted the verdict of six years imprisonment and ordered a re-execution of the proceedings.
Supreme Court President Thomas Philipp said that while the verdict was "watertight" with regard to the serious sexual abuse of a juvenile, the written verdict on the second indictment, rape, cannot be sufficiently proved.
According to the Supreme Court, the first court should have ascertained whether the offender had thought that the victim agreed to the sexual act and whether Amir A. had the intention to act against the will of the boy.
The rape case therefore must go back before the regional court. According to Austrian law, the sentence was also lifted. In the second legal process, which presumably will only take place in 2017, a new sentence must be imposed. The 20-year-old is expected to remain in custody until then.
An appeal court accepted the defence lawyer’s claim that the lower court had not done enough to ascertain whether or not the rapist had realised the schoolboy was saying no.
The attacker, identified as 20-year-old Iraqi migrant Amir A., had been treated to a trip to the Theresienbad pool in December 2015 as part of the integration process.
He had also been provided with a 15-year-old helper and translator who was supposedly teaching him how to integrate into life in Vienna.
At the pool, Amir A. dragged the schoolboy, aged ten, into the changing rooms where he locked the door and violently sexually assaulted him, leaving him in need of urgent treatment at a local children's hospital. The boy is still plagued by massive post-traumatic stress disorder.
The boy, known only as Goran, grew up in Austria with his Serbian mother.
After the rape, Amir A. went back to the swimming pool and was enjoying himself on the diving board when police turned up.
The ten-year-old had told a lifeguard he had been attacked, and he informed the police.
Amir A., who had worked in Iraq as a taxi driver, was still clothed in swimwear when handcuffed. He confessed to the rape, saying he knew it was wrong but did it anyway because it was a "sexual emergency" as he did not had sex for four months.
He was found guilty of serious sexual assault and rape of a minor and was sentenced to six years in jail. Yet in a bizarre twist, the Supreme Court lifted the verdict of six years imprisonment and ordered a re-execution of the proceedings.
Supreme Court President Thomas Philipp said that while the verdict was "watertight" with regard to the serious sexual abuse of a juvenile, the written verdict on the second indictment, rape, cannot be sufficiently proved.
According to the Supreme Court, the first court should have ascertained whether the offender had thought that the victim agreed to the sexual act and whether Amir A. had the intention to act against the will of the boy.
The rape case therefore must go back before the regional court. According to Austrian law, the sentence was also lifted. In the second legal process, which presumably will only take place in 2017, a new sentence must be imposed. The 20-year-old is expected to remain in custody until then.
Verdict on swimming pool rape case overturned
Posted from thelocal.at
Austria
Refugees
Crime
Iraq
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 17
5
5
0
Maybe the perpetrator can get Hillary to defend him like she did the 12 year old she was laughing about.
(5)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
PO1 John Crafton - Point was, she didn't. Believe me, I have researched this one.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
And in his culture what he did was 100% ok. ... Animals is all I can say, well that and what a jacked up court system.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
So you're say that he boy had agreed to this sexual act or was it that a 10 year old boy instigated the sexually-deprived lunatic into raping him? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!! Here's the bottom line, pancake: A child was raped by an adult. The child was injured from the rape and now was massive PTSD. The guy shouldn't get 6 years or have the case overturned; he should be left in GenPop with them knowing what this guy did and just.....shut off the lights.
(4)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
Yeah, but thats a normal day in the majority of the middle east. Women? Forget it. Panties off and shut up or I'll slap you senseless. Girls? Little better treatment as I, as a girls father, can demand a handsome dowry from anyone wanting her as a wife. Boys? Not to be disgusting but boy+genital+adult has been in the middle eastern news before, hasn't it? So while the boy may have been screaming for his life, their culture doesn't "hear" it. Remember **YOU** are the only person that counts. Not the victim. And unfortunately, unlike "the arabs" who will come onboard your ship, base, plane, etc and read you a book of things you can and can't do in their society, we sadly (pussies that we are) encourage them. So from his perspective, he did nothing wrong.
(0)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
PO3 Donald Murphy - It's sad to hear that perspective but, you're right. I can't and probably will ever understand that culture, their "acceptance" of doing what they do; this in example.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
A1C Doug Towsley - I believe that we can get our points across without giving a dissertation on only one aspect or maybe two aspects of the current subject matter. My point on this is that going along extremes of any single part of the issue will not solve it or educate as a whole.
As for tooting our own horn and pretending that stuff like that only happens somewhere else or that those attitudes are outdated, that is a whole subject in and of itself. to give you a fine example of that without going into a dissertation - The vocal majority that wants legalized marijuana are also the same group that wants alcohol and tobacco products outlawed. A bot off topic, but that attitude is just as hypocritical.
Bottom line to my point, is that extremes swing both ways and people have used religion as an excuse for way to long.
I think that both of us agree on the salient points of the discussion, just not on the path to get to the end result that we would like to see.
As for tooting our own horn and pretending that stuff like that only happens somewhere else or that those attitudes are outdated, that is a whole subject in and of itself. to give you a fine example of that without going into a dissertation - The vocal majority that wants legalized marijuana are also the same group that wants alcohol and tobacco products outlawed. A bot off topic, but that attitude is just as hypocritical.
Bottom line to my point, is that extremes swing both ways and people have used religion as an excuse for way to long.
I think that both of us agree on the salient points of the discussion, just not on the path to get to the end result that we would like to see.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google