In a reversal of the normal procedure, a (female) refugee helper in Germany had to appear in court on a charge of raping her allegedly underage (male) client.
Educator in court for raping 15-year-old Afghan boy
When a woman and a male refugee come into conflict in a rape trial, the distribution of roles is usually not hard to figure out. In a trial at the Landshut county court house things are different for a change: The 45-year-old educator Manuela M. is accused of having raped an allegedly 15-year-old unaccompanied minor in 2015.
The mother of two had worked as an educator in a live-in community for minor refugees in Kumhausen (Landshut county). This is where she met the Afghan boy for the first time. According to his registration, the boy was only 15 years old, but — surprise — all of the involved witnesses thought he was significantly older. At this point, it shouldn’t even have to be specifically mentioned any longer that he was unable to produce any identification.
At the trial, the refugee appeared as a joint plaintiff against the defendant at taxpayers’ expense, and accused the educator of having unprotected sexual intercourse with him against his will.
But on the first day of trial the defendant told an exact opposite story of what happened: The supposed victim had snuck into her room one night and had down her pants. There was no intercourse, however, because she had defended herself, she stated. Unfortunately the 15-year-old’s DNA was found on her body, and in her vagina. Therefore the credibility of the defendant dropped significantly, which let the court to instead believe the version of events that the young refugee had told.
Did gender play a role in the reaching of a verdict?
One thing Manuela M. Had going in her favor was the day after the incident the Afghan had been bragging about having been to bed with her, until he decided that it was actually rape. Furthermore, the refugee had sworn to his “educator” that he was 22 years old, which had corresponded with his appearance. Also the court decided that the educator had not intentionally abused the dependency relationship between herself and the minor refugee. And since it seemed hard to fathom that a woman the height of 160cm could inflict violence on someone with the stature of a man, she was therefore acquitted.
It is interesting to imagine how the verdict would have come out had the refugee been female and the educator male.
“Minor” refugee fought hard against having his age determined
Also, in the acquittal of the defendant, big role played by the fact that the victim vehemently refused to agree to a professional determination of his age through a doctor. Not surprisingly, since he most likely would have had to give up his “all around carefree package” containing security from deportation, first-class housing, care and fun for roughly €5000 per month.
In any case, the Afghan didn’t show a lot of interest in the trial. He missed the first day of court entirely, and on the second day he only showed up long enough to give his testimony, which took place sequestered from the public. After that, he left the courtroom immediately to take care of more important things.