A Tale of Two Court Cases About an Alleged Gang Rape of a 12yo
As the court acquits one of the two alleged rapists, the subsequent trial of the other defendant casts significant doubts about the course of events
Most topics I write about here are appalling, to say the least, with some of the issues being, of course, way, way worse. Today, I shall report on one of the latter issues, however, and I shall state for the record that I’m thoroughly appalled.
You see, a few months ago I reported about a mass-rape of a 12 year-old girl in Vienna:
A few days ago, a court acquitted one of the main perpetrators.
Yes, read that sentence again, if you don’t believe me. Here’s what happened in the court room as reported by legacy media.
Translation, emphases, and [snark] mine. That sinking, nauseating feeling you’re perhaps feeling when reading, well, that’s both of us, I suppose.
12-year-old Alleged Rape Victim: 16-year-old Acquitted
Court assumed sexual but ‘completely consensual’ acts. It was ‘not recognisable’ to the accused that the girl did not consent to this.
By Michaela Reibenwein, Kurier, 5 Dec. 2024 [source]
A 16-year-old who stood trial in connection with the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl on Thursday was acquitted. According to the judge, no violence against the victim could be established. The ruling is not final.
The 16-year-old defendant was seated between his parents in the courtroom on Monday. The victim’s mother sat on the other side. In between: numerous media representatives who have been following the case for months.
A then 12-year-old girl is said to have been abused by several boys. In a hotel room, a car park, in the stairwell. Kurier also reported on the case [I’ll mention, however briefly, that the very same female reporter, Michaela Rebenwein, wrote a piece in early March 2024 entitled ‘When “No” Does Not Count’, and you can perhaps ‘guess’ how the piece ran:
The case takes place in an environment in which young men believe they can take whatever they want…
The ordeal lasted for months. Kurier has seen the investigation file that shows how this case began and how a spiral could develop from which the girl could no longer escape. It is an attempt to come to terms with the case…
And now we’ll return to the same Ms. Rebenwein’s reporting (sic) of the trial.]
The accused is one of around 15 boys who have been identified. He is 16, has curly hair and comes from Syria. He is accused of rape and sexual assault. But none of this, he insists, is true.
The prosecutor’s version is different: he is said to have approached the girl in Helmut Zilk Park in early 2023. He lured her to the top floor of a multi-storey car park and urged her to have sex. He later wrote her messages saying he had sex videos of her and would delete them if they met again for oral sex.
‘This kind of prejudgement taking place here is unbelievable. My client was insulted from all sides’, says his lawyer Andreas Reichenbach. And he speaks of a ‘victim staging’.
‘It’s true that the girl was 12 at the time. Everything else is construed’, says Reichenbach. There is nothing to suggest that the girl did anything under duress. ‘She didn’t initially claim that to the police either.’
Shame?
Rather, the girl had had sexual contact with around 30 boys. ‘That then came to light.’ The lawyer believes that the girl was ashamed to say that this had not happened voluntarily [remember: ‘believe her’ is the rule here].
The 16-year-old pupil says: ‘I’ve never had sex.’ Why should the girl incriminate him? ‘She must have mistaken me’, says the accused.
Even before the incidents became known, he had asked her why she was telling him that the two of them were having an affair.
But there are Instagram chats. The 16-year-old admits that the account belongs to him. It contains posts about the sex videos. ‘I didn't write that. Someone else logged into my Insta.’ He often gave his mobile phone to friends and let them use Instagram [so, the accused is an idiot for letting his ‘friends’ do so, if true; if this is an excuse, it’s pretty lame].
However, an acquaintance of the accused made an interesting statement to the police: the accused had asked him to lie for him. He should admit to having used his Instagram account [oh, he said-she said: what a surprise].
Memory Holes
When asked about this in court, the witness said: ‘I don’t remember that. I was a bit upset at the police station.’
The public was excluded from the questioning of the girl.
Bottom Lines Intermission
I’m unsure if I’m glad the piece provides no more information; I’ll say this, though: there are so many red flags in all of the snippets of information here, it boggles the mind, incl. how would a 12yo come up with the idea of having had sexual encounters with 30 people?
Then there’s the initial reporting I’ve linked to at the top of this post.
Yet, I will produce a kind of ‘answer’ to the many questions you, dear reader, might have at this point: somewhere down below the above piece in the Kurier, there is another link to the main trial, which took place a few days before—and which I’ll reproduce here (hence the crossed out Bottom Lines).
Twelve-year-old Abused: Trial Postponed Until January
A 17-year-old had to answer for rape in a car park. The boy confessed to the facts.
By Stephanie Angerer, Kurier, 26 Nov. 2024 [source]
The 17-year-old defendant looks childlike and lacks self-confidence as he takes his seat in the dock at the Regional Criminal Court in a grey suit on Tuesday. His father is also sitting in courtroom 304, just a few metres away.
The teenager is on trial before a lay assessor’s court [orig. Schöffengericht, i.e., a jury consisting of citiziens] for raping a then twelve-year-old girl in a car park. After the opening on Tuesday, the trial will continue on 7 January. At the request of the accused party’s representative Sascha Flatz, a friend of the accused who is said to have known about the assault will then be heard.
However, the assault is said to be not an isolated incident. The 12-year-old girl is said to have been sexually abused by a group of boys over a period of months—in stairwells or car parks. The gang is said to consist of 18 young people who are being investigated by the public prosecutor’s office.
Two Cases Are Pending
According to the public prosecutor’s office, only two cases have been charged [out of 18 alleged perpetrators; the other case is detailed in the first article]. The teens had met the twelve-year-old through a boy with whom the girl is said to have been in love and with whom there were allegedly tender encounters [orig. Zärtlichkeiten, i.e., exchanges short of sexual acts], but no more.
The sexual assaults by the 18 accused allegedly took place between February and June last year. The boys are of different nationalities, and they include Austrians, young people with Bulgarian, North Macedonian, and Turkish roots, a Serb, and an Italian.
Meeting in the Car Park
The young people exchanged information via Snapchat. The 17-year-old Syrian, who was on trial on Tuesday, also made contact with the girl in this way. According to the public prosecutor’s office, it was no longer possible to reconstruct exactly when this meeting took place. What is certain is that other young people were also present at the second meeting in a park in Favoriten. [the lesson here is obvious: if you have children/teens, be mindful of the kind of ‘social media’ they use]
‘After the others had gone home, the girl and the accused went to the top floor of a multi-storey car park. There they first had a consensual kiss’, said the public prosecutor on Tuesday. The boy then allegedly forced the 12-year-old to have oral sex. ‘The girl told him several times that she did not want to’, said the prosecutor. However, he ignored this.
On Tuesday, the 17-year-old will not only have to answer for rape. He is also accused of ‘misappropriating non-cash means of payment’—in other words, trying to make payments with someone else’s credit card. ‘I found the credit card on the street. I wanted to buy something online with it, but it didn't work anyway’, the accused testified in court. Data from other people’s ATM and credit cards was also found on his mobile phone [this will, likely, be the more problematic count here].
The accused confessed to the last two charges. His defence lawyer announced that he would confess to the rape. The lawyer also expressed doubts about the accusation of rape [how that works is beyond me, but I’m also not a lawyer: there’s a confession of rape, which is subsequently doubted by the defence lawyer]. The boy had claimed that he had never spoken to the girl about her age. He had assumed that he had had consensual sex with a girl of the same age, said the defence lawyer. However, according to the public prosecutor, the victim had ‘credibly described’ that she had been raped. [and now you’ll also understand why I placed the top-cited piece first: I’m unsure if this is the same public prosecutor (I doubt it), but the prosecutor in the above-related case would have, presumably, access to the case files from this trial, but for reasons unknown, ‘coercion’ couldn’t be established, and neither could ‘rape’ as the victim’s word was deemed no credible enough in that case: please don’t ask me how that works…]
The public was excluded from the trial for the sexual offence. The next trial in the case will take place on 5 December [that’s the above report]. A 16-year-old will be tried for rape and attempted sexual assault. He had also met the girl [it’s the same girl] at the beginning of the previous year and was later tracked down by the police via the chats. The 16-year-old had originally been investigated for sexual abuse of minors.
The public prosecutor’s final legal assessment revealed that violence may have been involved, which led to a charge of rape. The 16-year-old is also alleged to have tried to persuade the then 12-year-old to engage in further sexual acts after the first sexual intercourse by threatening her that he would otherwise make video footage of her public [and now let’s re-read the above reporting:
‘It’s true that the girl was 12 at the time. Everything else is construed’, says Reichenbach. There is nothing to suggest that the girl did anything under duress. ‘She didn’t initially claim that to the police either.’
Rather, the girl had had sexual contact with around 30 boys. ‘That then came to light.’ The lawyer believes that the girl was ashamed to say that this had not happened voluntarily.
See how that works? The same victim tells police she was raped, incl. the threat of violence, by one of the teens, which the court believes; a few days earlier, the other accused is acquitted because the prosecution couldn’t establish rape because…I dunno.]
Bottom Lines
Even if read from the bottom, i.e., chronologically, these articles don’t make sense: the 12yo girl was raped by one of the two accused, which she stated credibly in late November.
In early December, however, the second of the two accused alleged rapists is acquitted as both the victim’s claims are no longer deemed credible enough.
And that comes after police and the prosecution, according to the case file as cited by the journos here, have established the veracity of the victim’s claims.
Help me out here, please, because I’m quite confused.
We could also mention what else came to light in early December, namely the alleged ‘nymphomanical’ prior 30 sexual engagements, for which, according to these reports, no evidence other than a statement in court is offered.
I recall (but can’t find the link right now) a few pieces here and there in the last months about the victim who moved away from the area, received a bunch of donations, and had taken a long vacation.
It’s hard to know what is true and what is false; yet, I do think that these two connected trials show something else that I consider highly problematic: you can have one defendant be prosecuted for rape while the second defendant’s trial casts significant doubts on the accuracy and veracity of the made statements.
This reeks of two mistrials and/or the court of appeals, hence I think we’ll hear more about this before too long.
A parental posse could bring these sorts of problems to a just conclusion.
Two things:
(1) Presumption of innocence. I know, I know, but the prosecution still has to prove that the accused is guilty of the crime he was accused of.
(2) Err, what is the age of consent in Austria? [Edit: Google says 14.] 12 seems awfully young. So even if we are to take the "nymphomaniac" allegation literally - the girl was 12.