In Judgment No. P.22.0306.F, the Belgian Court of Cassation addressed the material element of the criminal offense of sexism, as established under the Law of May 22, 2014 combating sexism in public spaces.
In Judgment No. P.23.0492.N, the Belgian Court of Cassation reviewed sexist and discriminatory remarks made by a lecturer during a conference held at a Belgian university. The Court of Cassation clarified how the mental element of the offense of sexism should be established. It held that intent can be inferred from factual elements identified by the trial judge, such as the nature and context of the remarks, where these cannot reasonably be interpreted otherwise.
This Virginia law defines rape as sexual intercourse with a complaining witness, or causing a complaining witness to engage in sexual intercourse with any other person, regardless of the existence of a spousal relationship and such act is accomplished (i) against the complaining witness's will, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person; or (ii) through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness; or (iii) with a child under age 13 as the victim.
Daniel Kerrigan sexually abused A.R., the 7-year-old daughter of his live-in girlfriend, for 3 years. The abuse was discovered when A.R.
In the case Nelson v. Commonwealth, the appellant, who was dating the 14-year-old victim’s cousin, showed the victim an explicit picture of his genitals and later touched her genitals while she slept. The appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual battery in the trial court, and he appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to prove the element of force. Aggravated sexual battery requires proving that the accused intentionally sexually molested a victim who is between 13 and 15 years old through nonconsensual force.
In Parker v. Commonwealth, the appellant was in a rocky, abusive relationship with the victim since 1989. He had been convicted of stalking the victim under a prior version of § 18.2-60.3 in 1994. He was in jail in 1995, and he proceeded to repeatedly call the victim over the course of a few days.
On October 14, 2013, a woman reported that she had been deceived with a false modeling job offer, then transported, drugged, threatened, and sexually exploited by a criminal network. She was recruited by a university student who, together with others, kept her in conditions of sexual slavery and moved her to different locations for abuse.
The victim and her husband lived with the appellant and the appellant’s girlfriend. The victim, accompanied by her sister, came home and knocked on the door to be let in because the door was latched. The appellant opened the door, and then he grabbed the victim’s breasts and twisted “as hard as he could” for about a minute. The appellant was charged and convicted of sexual battery, which requires proving that the accused sexually abused someone with nonconsensual force. On appeal, he contended that the evidence did not support finding that the force requirement was met.
In 2001, the female victim was kidnapped, tortured, raped and kept in captivity for four months. All complaints made by her sister to the competent authorities related to her sister’s disappearance were dismissed by the police. In 2007, the competent criminal court issued a partial conviction to the offender. He was convicted for the crimes of kidnapping and captivity.
In State v. Zeidell, 154 N.J. 417 (1998), the Supreme Court of New Jersey addressed a case involving two young children, ages eight and ten, who observed the defendant masturbating from a distance while on a public beach. The defendant was initially convicted of second-degree sexual assault and endangering the welfare of the children. The Appellate Division reversed the sexual assault convictions, finding that the statutory requirement of specific victimization had not been proven. On appeal, the Supreme Court reinstated the convictions.
