7 votes

Swedish Woman CONVICTED of "Assaulting" a Scum, after he Sexually Fondled her!

Ladies, visit Swedish nightclubs at your own peril:

Woman convicted for hitting bottom grabber

Published: 26 Mar 13 10:19 CET | Print version

In its ruling the Lund District Court agreed that the woman was subject to a "serious provocation", but ultimately ruled her actions couldn't be considered as acting in self-defence.

A 23-year-old woman who slapped a man in the face after he grabbed her rear end has been convicted of assault by a court in southern Sweden.

The 27-year-old who made the unwanted move escaped charges for the incident after a preliminary criminal investigation was dropped.

"This goes to show that it's okay for guys to grab girls any way they want," the 23-year-old woman told the Metro newspaper.

===============================================================

Could such lunacy where the clear VICTIM is charged with a crime for defending oneself against an aggressor, also happen in America, when Socialist Collectivists take over?

You bet it can.

What else would you call innocent citizens who are Kafkaesquely charged with "assaulting an officerTax God" for merely intuitively putting their arms up defensively, to block crazed lunatics pummeling them with batons and/or fists?

So, here's a Swedish woman who intuitively defended herself, not only does the court not protect her (as it's 'supposedly' designed to be...right), the clear victim, but worse, the Socialist Monarchic State of Sweden ORDERED her to pay the fondler! WTF??



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Showing this to the guys at

Showing this to the guys at work as I type. Will write back their response.

Another TSA Agent Scum in the News?

Groped a lady tourist from Sweden?

"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_enlistment

There is no duration defined in the Oath

Double Standard?

If a woman grabs a guy's behind is it the same deal?

I have seen numerous times when a 'cougar' grabs a younger male's behind at a bar including my own. I felt violated .... yet I did not press charges. I forgave her for her transgression and let her by me three shooters as compensation for my suffering ;)

donvino

double standard? sure. an immutable reality of life, and

often accepted legal doctrine: "force disparity" as I commented below: http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3015334

given a similar scenario, almost no jury in America will ever accept that punching and breaking nose of a female who's moving on man at a club, involuntarily, an acceptable level of self-defense, unless you work for govt.

Now the 'govt double standard?' If you want "double standard," talk about a real institutionalized "double standard"; a 'legal' one at that, and not a cultural one...on second thought, since statism is a religion, I suppose govt double standard is both institutional and cultural.

while principally, no doubt, I understand the argument, which is why it's still culturally one of the biggest inconvenient & often socially & psychologically controversial realities to over come: the fact that yes, women TOO rape vulnerable men, along with same gender rapes/sexual violations, etc.

but from a scientific, biological, cultural, societal, and often 'legal' stand pt, it's hard to overcome eons of 'protect the girl' instinct in human males.

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

A lot of Spin by the OP

Serious spin going on here. To anyone who's ever been in a nightclub, you know that sometimes a guy deserves a slap across the face because everyone knows it is possible for guys to act lewdly, inappropriately, etc, etc. Let's be real here though. Girls who go to nightclubs know that the environment is a little juiced up, that's why they are their, to be hit on by cute guys and have a good time. Sometimes, a guy might get out of hand saying something over the line or touching inappropriately. The woman has a right to complain, and in some cases slap the offender. In this case, the guy patted (not groped incessantly) a woman's butt. I totally agree its inappropriate. Probably even a slap in the face offense. However, she did not slap him. She turned around, wound up as hard as she could, and shattered his nose completely. She completely cold punched him, breaking his nose, hospitalizing him for the night.

The reason I find the OP incredibly out of line with the spin on this article is because that is simply not acceptable behavior by this woman. Going to nightclubs with my girlfriend before, other girls have touched my ass, flirted with me by touching me, I have even had my cock grabbed. I, as a man, have told these girls to knock it off, get away. I didn't break their noses by winding up a big a punch as I could. (This has only happened if I am with a cute girl though, girls always go the taken guys haha) I do not have the right to cold punch a girl in the face breaking her nose for being inappropriate. Yes, guys can be even more aggressive and sometimes even warrant getting punched. But I feel like this OP doesn't know the facts of this case and just wants to use this sensationalized story to fill some type of personal agenda.

I also feel like calling the guy SCUM in big capital letters in the headline is dehumanizing a man who, although acted inappropiately, is still a human being with a mom, dad, hopes and dreams. Men are human too...

LOL. if you say so;

But I feel like this OP doesn't know the facts of this case and just wants to use this sensationalized story to fill some type of personal agenda.

Funny, I was thinking the same about what you're doing. As further, blatantly exhibited by this:

I also feel like calling the guy SCUM in big capital letters in the headline is dehumanizing a man who, although acted inappropiately, is still a human being with a mom, dad, hopes and dreams. Men are human too...

really? oh boo boo. This sounds like Henry Makow talking. No thanks.

She turned around, wound up as hard as she could, and shattered his nose completely.

Wow, she did all that? Where was that exact detail ever cited in the article?? Talk about presumptive script imagining.

Frankly, nose bone/cartilage is not that hard to break. Anyone who wrestled in HS, boxed, or taken martial arts would tell you that.

And the rest of your personal 411 on your club experience, dude, no offense, but seriously, get over yourself. Think you're advertising a bit too hard about your supposed comeliness. If so, good for you. I can care less; it's a bit too 'hey look at me, I'm cool' for my taste. but whatev.

And, WTF? I dare you to explain the below ad infiabsurdum to someone in Texas:

The reason I find the OP incredibly out of line with the spin on this article is because that is simply not acceptable behavior by this woman...I didn't break their noses by winding up a big a punch as I could

If a douchebag ever physically intentionally fondled my girl that way, and she clocked his ass? I'd clap her on. "simply not acceptable behavior" for a woman to defend her body (her property) from aggression? Are you really a R3VOL or some statist apologist who abhor individual self-defense of any kind? Or worse, a Canadian or UK govt official who regularly arrest gunowners for defending themselves against armed invaders, in their own homes??

If you initiate force against someone, I'd say the idiot deserves what's comin'.

Also, unless that said 'lady' in your pastlife club escapades who supposedly grabbed your junk uninvited was (as we say in Long Beach) a one ton ho, who can kick your ass, you are not a girl, dude: in law, there's a legal doctrine called "force disparity."

That's why in almost NO jurisdiction would they ever consider it an acceptable level of self defense (unless you wear polyester costume) if you as a man, were to 'fend' off a smaller female club patron moving on you, uninvited, by punching them in the face/breaking nose, especially if she looks anything above Kathy Griffin, hell even 1pt above her, on the 0-10 scale. Juries hate single females getting beaten, justified or not.

Moving on from your fantasy lawful self-defense vs. your female junk groper, frankly, I have no idea what man would ever think it's okay to have a girl be groped, uninvited, unless you work for govt, or particularly the TSA.

Even their own court and the defendant, as so far stated in the above article and also in another article that I read that's in Swedish (read via Google translator), did not deny that an actual intentional, willful grabbing (ie. violates the non-aggression principle?) is what actually occurred. As far as descriptions go, this apparently wasn't a case of harmless 'brush by,' intentional or unintentional.

I suppose by your standards I'm supposed to hate on a FemiNazi if she gets groped, or worse raped. Sorry, as you stated, with gender flip:

I also feel like calling the girl SCUM in big capital letters in the headline is dehumanizing a girl who, although acted inappropiately, is still a human being with a dad, mom, hopes and dreams. Women are human too...

Be that as it may, c'est la vie. Neither of us were there.

Love me some daily absurdists though. So thanks.

PS. While the entire tenor of your reply is pretty self-explanatory, the mere fact that you actually thought that I capitalized "scum" when the title of the thread plainly capitalized "CONVICTED," tells me that your reply is a 100% knee-jerk response projecting your rather deeply conflicted internal gender-inequality issues.

I also feel like calling the guy SCUM in big capital letters in the headline is dehumanizing a man

No?

But that's okay brother. I still love all my R3VOL peeps. So project away. But let's not pretend your internal psychological dispute isn't any less or equal to the apparent level of 'agenda' you deemed to presume I manifested.

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Niether of us were there

I read about this somewhere else too where I read that he had a broken nose and hospital bills, so, that's where I got that from. I do agree with you in terms of if someone messed with my girl I would be completely in defense of her for defending herself.

Look, first off, I didn't know who Makow is until you mentioned him, I don't appreciate you linking me to an anti jew person. I didn't read much of his site, but I felt like he was a typical anti-jew guy.

Acting like Sweden is some type of anti-woman socialist state is ridiculous though. I have a friend from Sweden. I've read about Sweden. Guys there get all the money taken from them pretty much. So do women. However, women get back over 50% more benefits from their government than guys do. That's not a socialist state trampling on the rights of women. The opposite, in fact. A lot of guys there date russians and FSU girls because they don't like be treated poorly by women who receive so much from them already without their consent via government theft.

Were just going to have to agree to disagree on this one dude. I respect your really upset that a girl got her butt touched and didn't get a medal for breaking the guys nose, but I think she over-reacted.

I also think your missing the larger point concerning the lack of economic liberty in Sweden getting so mad over this little case.

actually, aside from,

as you called it, "anti Jew" guy, Makow very much reflects commonly expressed sentiments of 'fix male/female double standard!'-guy.

Never called you an "anti-Jew guy." My allusion was more on the gender inequality issue, which he is more well known for, not his 'anti-jew' nonsense. Plus, having researched his stuff as one often comes across when one researches anything NWO, 9/11, Rothchilds et al, he IS a Jew who converted to a Messianic Jew. So he's not "a typical anti-Jew guy." Besides, I have Jews in the family.

"Acting like Sweden is some type of anti-woman socialist state is ridiculous though."

- I never said or acted like that. You're perceiving things not said by me, obviously. Need I point out 'read the headline 1st, before responding!' again? lol.

"I have a friend from Sweden. I've read about Sweden. Guys there get all the money taken from them pretty much. So do women. However, women get back over 50% more benefits from their government than guys do."

- THAT, I do know, and agree with you. The having researched some divorce cases, and child custody fights in Sweden, indeed, their 'laws' are ridiculously biased toward women, as they are here.

"That's not a socialist state trampling on the rights of women. The opposite, in fact."

Well, a socialist state is any state that controls re-distribution of resources/income/wealth/property. So...by any factual definition, and by any libertarian/paleo-con/AnCap/Minarchist/Constitutionalist standards, Sweden (while still 'monarchic' and the true powers still reside in their 'royal' family despite their parliamentary democracy charade), IS the very definition of a Socialist State which has controlled re-distribution of wealth; it matters not whether it specifically tramples on "rights of women," or not.

ALL States, the Leviathan, by definition, trample of "rights of"...er...like EVERYONE?? And, particularly a Socialist Leviathan, No?

"A lot of guys there date russians and FSU girls because they don't like be treated poorly by women who receive so much from them already without their consent via government theft."

- That, is a similar dating/marrying pattern also observed here as well in other European countries, post East Bloc break up.

My whole point of thread was simply pointing out an example of appropriate vs. inappropriate level of force, truly culpable party, individual self defense and how it's viewed by the State, force disparity, prosecutorial bias, and cultural obstacles/double standards involved in male-female, female-male conflicts, and whether that can also happen in America with the current trajectory of 24/7, statists' socially engineered demonization of guns and how the very fundamental notion of an individual right of self defense may survive or ill interpreted in this current climate of a heavy attempt at manufactured consent of mass hoplophobic hysteria.

Speaking strictly of English Commonwealth nations who share many similar legal doctrines derivative of the English Common Law, as we do, the news of Britons, Canadians, Aussies, and Kiwis getting arrested for fending off an armed invader inside their own homes are too numerous to cite.

History clearly shows that 'Laws' are usually byproducts of prevailing, contrived, connived, politically maneuvered will of an era, often damn near 100% manipulated into existence, by opportune political operatives.

Being such, I'm merely positing 'can it happen here, too?'

As I stated, if you take away the alchemical acceptance of govt uniforms by a brainwashed populace, of course it can.

'Cause it happens every day here in America, too: VICTIM citizens routinely get charged with "assaulting an officer" even as they're often, being wrongfully arrested, all for the simple intuitive act of putting one's arms up in a defensive posture to block being hit in the face by an oncoming object in the hand of ANY aggressor, whether it's a common thug, or a uniformed state actor thug beating up the citizen.

Because typically, people would generally see the woefully obvious transgression in such cases as the Swedish female defendant had to endure, if you simply switch the "Scum" with a "cop," as you had an internal gender-victim reaction, intuitively, so too would many among the populace.

Point? Double Standard isn't only 'double standard' when it's between a man vs. a woman; morally it 'should' be the same, if it's between a citizen defendant vs. govt transgressor.

That, was the point.

So, as long as you're gonna posit the notion that you not punching your former female club patron aggressor as an equally applicable case to highlight your internal sense of injustice while accusing me of having an agenda, while you simultaneously displaying that you've clearly not even read the Headline, as you've already proven that you've mistaken me for capitalizing "SCUM" when I only capitalized "CONVICTED," clearly displays your own personal bias via your 'biased perception Freudian Slip:' all tells me more about you than me, my friend.

Thanks. But this will be my last reply on the matter. My whole point was: the inept judicial system there, as here, cultural bias & complexities and sheeple routinely resorting to govt to solve an insolvable. Nothing less, nothing more.

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

I actually have come around to your side

after reading all that. Yes, people, unequivocally, should have the right to defend themselves. My point is that going to a club is voluntary. If a girl goes to a club, wearing something provocative, at a hip place in the city with a lot of people, she's bound to get touched at least once in a manner that would be deemed inappropriate in everyday life. That's not going to change, and I don't think a proper reaction is to knock someone in the face. It's like saying someone who accidentally walked into the wrong house he thought was his friends, started apologizing to the owner, and the owner shot him anyway. Under the law in some states the owner is within his right to do that to a trespasser, but it doesn't make it right.

WOW!

Good thing it was not my wife. She has attitude. As she says, "I would put him in the ICU, then when he got out, I would be getting out of jail, find him, and do it again!" She has a temper!!

I find this stuff, really, distasteful, for a government to do to its women! I would never have done this, except to someone I knew real well(girlfriend), before being married. And, to only my wife, now!

I agree

This is exactly where we are heading.

Ron Paul convert from the Heart of Dixie

Swedes know their hockey

I'm sure someone "took a number."

And was convicted of sexual assault I'm sure.

Oh wait, no...let me guess, she was wearing a miniskirt and was therefore "asking for it."

ain't it just like every aggressor to

actually feign victimhood?

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

ROTFL

:)