"Åsa Linderborg replies Martina Montelius if hobbyjuridik"
"This is a kulturartikel which is a part of Aftonbladet's opinionsjournalistik."
"the DEBATE. I understand that not all of the reason that I surrounding the case of Jean-Claude Arnault. I know really not really for yourself what I think of the two judges, which should be apparent from my comments (Aftonbladet, 2 oct and 3 dec). The question is difficult. However, what I can't fathom, is why I and Lena Andersson, who commented on the judgment in Today's News (8 dec), are considered to have no legitimacy at all to discuss the matter. "
"the Courts belong to us, it is we citizens who have given them the responsibility to interpret our legislation. In our legal system has "
"I have been sitting juror, in a court in Uppsala, so I know a little something about the human failings that are behind every crime. Such is also the case of Jean-Claude Arnault, and it applies to both him and the victim. To interpret the law can be how difficult, even for lawyers. If not, would you, Lena Andersson points out, to be able to populate the courts with robots. "
"In all the crimes is a context that both explains and complicates the. Murder, manslaughter and assault – before the judge asks you why the situation at all occurred. How do the circumstances look like? Know the people involved to each other and how? What did the one, and what did the other, is there any mitigating circumstance?"
"nHovrätten said at the press conference on 3 december that, in its judgment had taken into account all the kringförhållanden. Good so, but according to Montelius, and others who now make themselves into spokespersons for the rule of law, all such questions will be disqualified. According to them it is completely irrelevant, yes the closest to an assault, to bring up the issue that the plaintiff follows the rapist, who she says she is terrified of, home again, and again, and again and then sharing the apartment with him in Paris, where she also brought with him his daughter. "
"the Argumentation oscillates between the claim that there are no rules for how raped women behave, why it is useless to discuss the matter, it is just so here raped women behave, why there is no reason to at all discuss the matter."
"Surely, raped women return to their abusers time and time again; women can be raped in their marriage day on day on day. It is often the way codependency works. But all the relationships that end up before the court do not resemble each other and must, therefore, be subject to a discussion. Concreteness can be relentless, but in the case of Arnault, it is necessary to at all be able to discuss Sweden's most high-profile våldtäktsdom. "
"the distance that aches in me with this sentence is the same thing that I tried to discuss it last year: That Metoo has established the image of women as all through the vulnerable and weak, as victims, completely without will or discretion. The plaintiff's own story does not give tests on it, on the contrary. "
"It doesn't mean that I think that she may blame herself or sjåpar, I'm just saying that the media image is simplified. It may have become so when a case should be heard in a spirit of the times has its own heated logic and the court proceedings also take place behind closed doors. "
"Rebecka Kärde, which therefore suggests that it is only lawyers who will discuss the rule of law, considers himself to be competent enough for the following statement:"
"It is true that it is possible to find a number of wobbly våldtäktsdomar through the years, but calling it for the practice obliges. And equally true is that the correct judgments led to the emotional edge mediedrev. It was, therefore, the Supreme court 2009 ruled that the standard of proof may not be put lower in the våldtäktsmål than in other criminal cases. It should be completely obvious, but the law is a variable matter and the judge is no more than people. That's why HD exists."
"nMetoo the revolution is about to knead on it here. A kind of post-colonial perspective says that a woman always has the right to her story; if she feels raped, she is it. It is this approach that lies behind the claim that there is no rule of law for raped women, which is a pretty dangerous claim in a time when trust is eroding overall. "
"In a court of law requires it, thankfully, yet stödbevisning, the case Arnault is an example of it, but strong voices want to have a different order. It is here we can only discuss by talking about individual cases, how painful it is for everyone involved."
"nHur would it look like if we had not."
"Just when it is such a widely disliked person who is Jean-Claude Arnault, there are reasons to study the judgment carefully, it is difficult and sensitive, there is no reason to refrain. The problem is hardly that ickejurister discuss the case openly, but that the lawyers did not say a word."