Man acquitted of secretly removing condom during sex

The 29-year-old Rotterdammer who the first in the Netherlands convicted of secretly removing his condom during sex, acquitted on appeal. The court in The Hague says that it has not been proven that the man took off the condom secretly, either steal name

In March last year, the man was sentenced to three months in prison by the court. He also had to pay 1,000 euros in compensation to the victim. The Rotterdammer was acquitted of rape, but found guilty of rape. The court decided that he forced his partner to enter without an abortion.

The Public Prosecution Service wanted a heavier sentence and appealed. According to the Public Prosecution Service, there was not only coercion, but also rape.

The man is said to have taken off his condom during sex on a date in August 2021 without his bed partner’s knowledge. But the court says that this cannot be proven, also because there is a lack of additional evidence. Conversations via WhatsApp between the suspect and the complainant do not provide enough information.

A suspect in a similar case has previously been acquitted, also due to insufficient evidence. He suggested the condom”in the heat of the moment” that he had forgotten and intended to use a condom, as he had done earlier in the evening. The court then considered that it had not been proved that there was an intention. No appeal was made in that case.

Unlike the Netherlands, theft is clearly included in the law, for example, in Germany, Switzerland and New Zealand. But offenders can be convicted of this act in the Netherlands from July 1, the effective date of the new Sexual Offenses Act.

Secretly not using contraception can fall within the new crime of intentional rape, Justice Minister Yesilgöz explained last year. “This means that victims of theft are sufficiently protected under the criminal law against such violations of their sexual integrity,” she answered questions about the new law at the time.

In the new rules a distinction is made between intent and guilt in coercion. In both cases, sex took place against the victim’s wishes. The difference between the two testimonies is determined by the perception of the person who committed the crime.

By ‘guilt’, the perpetrator wrongly assumes that the other person wanted sex, while there were signs from which the perpetrator might have decided that wasn’t it. And there is ‘intent’ if the person who committed the crime knows that the other person did not want sex or if he is aware of that possibility, but if he continues anyway.

Another victim told Nieuwsuur how she was robbed at the age of 19. The consequences were terrible: