sex offender rights

The defendants, both Serbs and a police officer, were accused of forcibly abducting a Kosovar Albanian civilian female and raping her, thus committing the offense of War Crime Against the Civilian Population, in violation of Article 153 of the Criminal Code of Kosovo in addition to other offences.  The court of first instance acquitted both defendants of war crimes, but the acquittal was annulled by the appellate court, which sentenced them to 10 and 12 years of imprisonment respectively.  Both defendants appealed.  The Supreme Court held that minor discrepancies of a witness

The Prohibition on Prostitution Consumption Law aims at reducing sex work by banning its consumption as part of an integrated process, which also includes education and explanation to the public and the expansion of treatment and rehabilitation for people in sex work. The law determines the administrative offense of “consumption of prostitution” that any person who pays for or attempts to pay for sex is breaking the law and may be fined a fine of 2,000 NIS. For a repeat offence, the fine is doubled to 4,000 NIS.

The defendant was charged the defilement of the complainant, a 17-year-old girl. In his defence, the accused claimed that he could not get an erection (albeit, apparently, only after the magistrate raised the question himself). During the proceedings, a woman stood up in court and volunteered to ascertain whether the accused could obtain an erection.

In the predawn hours of a Sunday morning, police officers came upon a cab parked in a secluded location.  A woman (apparently an adolescent) emerged from the car naked and told the officers she was being raped by the driver, who was found with his pants down.  Prosecutors charged the driver with attempted sexual violence.  After the driver pled guilty and was sentenced to 50 months of imprisonment, the victim appealed the classification of the offense and prosecutors opposed the appeal.  Based on evidence in the record, the court of appeals modified the conviction to sex

The Sexual Offences Act Chapter 42 was enacted to introduce new provisions in relation to sexual offences, their prevention and the protection of children from harm from other sexual acts. Part 1 makes new provision about sexual offences. It covers the non-consensual offences of rape, assault by penetration, sexual assault, and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent. It defines “consent” and “sexual” and sets out evidential and conclusive presumptions about consent. It covers child sex offences and offences involving an abuse of a position of trust towards a child.

On 24 May 2013, the applicant was found guilty of the abduction and rape of a 14-year-old girl. He had a good relationship with the parents of the girl and thus was a trustworthy person to her. The applicant’s first appeal application was denied. He renewed his application and the Supreme Court of Criminal Appeal granted the application. This time his conviction was quashed, the sentences were set aside, and the Court ordered a new trial at the next sitting of the Circuit Court.

In U.S. v. Robinson, 702 F.3d 22 (2012), a federal grand jury convicted the defendant-appellant of child sex trafficking in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1591. A victim testified that she started dating the defendant when she was 17 years old but had told him and others that she was 19 years old. She insisted that the defendant was only living off her income as a prostitute and was not a pimp facilitating prostitution.

The man was accused of intentionally pouring sulfuric acid on his minor daughter, causing her severe bodily harm in the form of chemical burns to her head, face and other parts of her body. In addition, during the trial, it was found out that when the girl was 13-14 years old, her father committed lewd acts of a sexual nature with her over a long period of time. During the trial, the man did not admit his guilt.

The defendant was accused of attempting to rape a girl in a city park in a crowded place, using violence, namely, strangling the victim with his hands and a belt to subdue her. The accused did not complete his criminal intent because an unknown boy and girl appeared nearby and frightened the rapist. As a result, the defendant hastily fled, leaving the victim lying on the ground.

The offender (the man was older than 18 years) repeatedly raped a girl under 14 years of age. The court of first instance sentenced him to nine years in prison (isolation for a certain period of time in a closed-type penal institution). When determining the sentence, the court took into account what it considered to be mitigating circumstances, namely: (i) sincere remorse; (ii) partial payment of damages; (iii) admission of guilt; (iv) no prior criminal record.