Easy: Grab the judges balls for 9 seconds or so as a fully legal form of protest
He admitted to groping the student without consent, but said it was a joke.
Fake news. The person was aquitted cause it was not the intention of the act. It was accidental. Simply as that. But western media love to spread hate against italy and italians.
How do you ACCIDENTALLY put your hands INTO someones pants for 10 fucking seconds?
This is not something that just happens. The fuck?
The situation was obviously more complicated than that, the sentence was long and i have no time to explain it cause i’m not a journalist. Spreading hate falsifing and omitting is the usual anglosaxon method to attack their enemies.
She described walking up a staircase to class with a friend, when she felt her trousers fall down, a hand touching her buttocks and grabbing her underwear.
“Love, you know I was joking,” the man told her when she turned around.
Would he say
“Love, you know I was joking,” the man told her when she turned around.
If it was an accident?
Additionally, what does
The situation was obviously more complicated than that, the sentence was long and i have no time to explain it cause i’m not a journalist.
refer to? Which sentence? You can just copy it over here, people can read.
Well, I can almost see the point that there needs to be a criteria to draw a line where there’s no way to call it accidental or incidental contact on a legal level.
However, I just groped my wife’s bobs for five seconds and she asked if it was foreplay or just because I was bored.
So, I think we can safely say that it sure as fuck isn’t ten seconds before it can be definitively called groping for the purposes of assault if five seconds between a couple is going to be noticeable as more than a friendly way of saying hello.
In other words, the judge is fucking crazy lol.
Not to mention that
a) going under the plaintiff’s outer clothing very clearly moves the onus of demonstrating that it was accidental back on the accused’s side, because no reasonable third-party can accept that you can accidentally slip and fall into someone’s pants
and
b) the accused admitted that the action was intentionally non-consensual, but their defence was that the motive was non-malicious
Even before we look at the duration, there are other factors that make the case way more clear-cut than this judge thinks it is.
That’s what you get when you vote right wing into your government. Fascists feel accepted and they are only against molestation when done by the evil foreigners. When it’s done by their own they see women as cattle for men to ogle and touch. Never believe their lies about being for “equality” or women’s rights.
The decision has been taken by a college of judges of the court (which is even worse than a single person).
