When a 15-year-old girl was sleeping with her boyfriend, she woke up to a message.
There he apologized for “pulling her”.
The boyfriend of the same age was convicted in the district court of sexual assault – and despite the fact that they agree that the word means inserting the fingers into the vagina, he is acquitted in the Court of Appeal, reports Today’s Law.
The now 17-year-old boy was convicted in the district court of sexual assault against his girlfriend of the same age. Now he is acquitted in the Göta Court of Appeal – due to the fact that the term “pulla” became a question of interpretation, reports Dagens Juridik.
Woke up because she was wet in the abdomen
The incident occurred in March 2022, writes The Express. The girl, who was 15 years old at the time, has stated in questioning that she woke up in the night because she was wet in the abdomen. When she went into the toilet, she saw that the boy had sent a message.
There he apologized for having “pulled” her while she was sleeping.
“Sorry, they didn’t mean to act like a jerk or pull you while you sleep,” read the message on Snapchat, according to Expressen.
According to the newspaper, both agreed on how they usually use the term: inserting fingers into the vagina. Therefore, according to the district court, it was beyond reasonable doubt that he had his fingers in the girl’s vagina against her will.
However, they did not consider that the act could be equated with sexual intercourse – and therefore acquitted him of rape. The boy was sentenced for sexual abuse to youth services for 75 hours and 35,000 kroner in damages.
Court of Appeal: There is uncertainty about the choice of words
However, the Göta Court of Appeal considers that there is reason to “exercise caution” when it comes to the concept of “pull”.
Despite the fact that both the girlfriend and the boyfriend agree on the meaning of the word – and that the prosecutor believes that in everyday language it means inserting fingers into a woman’s vagina – the Court of Appeal considers that there is uncertainty about how “thought out” the boy’s choice of words was during the night, writes Dagens Law.
In questioning, the boy has claimed that he did not intend what he was accused of.
The Court of Appeal writes in its judgment that the boy “at least” touched the outer parts of the girl’s abdomen – but that it cannot be proven that she was penetrated. Therefore, he is cleared of sexual abuse. Instead, he is sentenced for sexual harassment and receives both a reduced sentence and damages.