Three men were charged with rape of a minor in the forest of Malmi Hospital – for these reasons the court dismissed charges

Why The Helsinki District Court dismissed three men’s charges of suspected minor rape near Malmi Hospital?

This writing opens up the grounds on which the court decided to release men from the charges. HS reported on a liberating judgment on Saturday.

A consistent and structured judgment, says a professor of criminal law Sakari Melander. According to him, it has well opened all the factors that influenced the evidence.

« Here’s a pretty comprehensive examination of the available display and based on it the end result that is quite possible, » Melander says.

« The display threshold is not lower than usual, the story of the accused has been considered possible and has a presumption of innocence. »

To trial The leading events began when the men met last October in the morning of a 17-year-old girl in Malmi Hospital in Helsinki.

The girl had been brought there by an ambulance to survive because of her strong intoxication. He had blown 2.05 ounces.

According to the prosecutor, the men led the girl to the forest next to the hospital and forced sexual intercourse.

According to the indictment, the girl did not consent to sexual intercourse, at least not with all three. In addition, as the situation progressed, he could not form or express his will due to hops and fear.

The men denied the charges. According to them, the girl gave her consent to sexual contact and did not have violence. They denied knowing that the girl was a minor.

Two of the men were in their thirties, one born in 2006.

Was it possible for the girl to give consent to a strong drunk?

The girl kept her drunk so she could not form and express her will. He said he would not have given clear consent to sexual intercourse in such a situation.

The court evaluates written evidence, surveillance camera recordings and identification.

According to the court, the girl has actively and cheerful people actively and cheerful, before the suspected rape case, moved independently, albeit, and looked at the book and the phone. According to the court, the girl seemed happy.

It is clear from the recordings that he walked spontaneously and independently with the accused to the first forest and later to the second forest.

The court concludes that the girl was functional and was able to communicate. The drunkenness was not such that he could not have given consent to sexual intercourse.

What was the meaning of a potential condition?

According to the Criminal Code, the victim’s fear of fear can lead to or expressing his or her will.

The girl has told her that she remembers a little about what happened and the memories are fragile. He said in court that he hoped that the situations would end soon and would not worsen.

« He had not left the situation because he had not known how the men would react. He had thought it was most sensible not to try anything. He had been passive in sexual intercourse situations and had been at the mercy of the respondents and without the right to self -determination, » the judgment describes.

However, according to the judgment, there was not enough evidence that the girl was really in a state of fear referred to in legislation.

The court justifies this with video recordings. The behavior and interaction of the parties suggest that there was no state of fear.

How does the court evaluate consent?

The girl denied having given consent to sexual intercourse. He does not remember talking to the men about it.

According to the men, the girl was asked about sex in the hospital and answered affirmatively. According to the court, the video shows a situation that, based on gestures, expressions and movement, is suitable for men’s story.

The girl has said that she is possible that she has given her consent, even though she does not remember it.

In addition, one of the men said he had asked the girl in the forest.

Sexual connections took place in two places in the forest.

The first situation ended when the guards arrived. They had seen people going into the woods and wondered if the group was intended to burn the cloud there.

One guard told me that the situation they saw did not make concern. One of the men and the girl looked embarrassed when the guards arrived, rose up, dressed independently and left with two other men.

According to the indictment, the rape situation then continued in another place.

After the suspect rape, the girl behaved crying and hysterically.

According to law, it supports the girl’s perception that she did not give consent. On the other hand, behavior may, at least in part, be explained by the fact that the girl had woken up solely from the ground and mistakenly thought that her property had been stolen.

However, the court concluded that the men could reasonably realize that the girl had agreed to sexual intercourse. This is justified by video recordings and a statement by the guard.

According to the court, there is no evidence of violence, even though the girl was diagnosed with scratches and redness on the face, sides and legs.

How does a professor of criminal law assess the judgment?

According to Professor Melander, it is essential in the judgment what the surveillance records were reflected in the activities of the participants, such as leaving the forest. He also drew attention to the fact that the guards who visited the present did not notice anything special.

Surveillance camera recordings have not been visible to outsiders, so it is difficult to evaluate them.

According to him, the basic setting in the case is special when it comes to a minor drunk girl and three foreign -language men in the hospital bush at the morning and when it comes to having sex in such a situation. Therefore, he also considers it possible that the judgment could turn to the Court of Appeal.

« That is not so unequivocal. I should not be quite impossible that evaluation of the evidence would change in the Court of Appeal if it ends up there, » he says.

The prosecutor does not intend to appeal the judgment. According to him, no further clarification or better evidence in the Court of Appeal should be presented.