Man who raped 10-year-old boy at swimming pool in Austria has sentence overturned by Supreme Court

He isn't waiting "additional" sentence. The sencence was REPEALED and the retrial might set a NEW one, not additional.

The "procedural shortcoming" you mention seems to be that "it wasn't sufficiently well established whether the rapist thought the boy was giving consent or not". To this, I say:

  • This is not a procedural issue. It's about content, not paperwork.
  • If the Austrian law, really admits the posibility that a 10 YEAR OLD BOY could ever consent to having anal sex with a 20 year old stranger, I would be surpised.
  • Do you really think, in good faith, that it is reasonable that it wasn't established? It was established that the 10 year old boy was raped, ended up with mental issues, with his butt hurt. He wasn't a kid drawn from a forum of repressed gay horny precocious kids with problems. He was a 10 year old kid in a pool! He physically hurt the kid. All this is established, in who's mind can it still be reasonable to think he gave consent?
  • Who the hell has the burden of proof here? The kid denying consent, or the man doing the raping?? "Don't know" == "don't care" == "no consent"

Even if the title is slightly clickbaity, this piece of news is disgusting and relevant. Your comment is "clickbaity" in the opposite direction.

/r/europe Thread Parent Link - independent.co.uk