I am not saying that this didn't happen - I do not know - but that's not a reliable source. It is a propagandist working on behalf of the Kremlin, with an obvious anti-western agenda.
Having translated the page, it seems to me that this verdict was made via the legal system using legal processes. It calls into question the evidence and the testimony of the alleged victim, and it appears that this is the reason that the defendant was exonerated.
Her legal team have disputed this, and it is their job to do so, but I can't see anything in this story to say the defendant was exonerated because of an application of sharia law.
Perhaps justice has not been done here, but nothing you have produced here backs up the conclusions you have drawn in your OP.
For the record, I would be appalled if a woman was assaulted and this was not dealt with because of sharia law - anywhere, not just in a western country - but nothing I have seen here says that this has happened.
Well the fact that all evidence was layed aside, and the judges ruled in his favor becouse his family was better, and she was a woman and can't be trusted. I will try and get hold of the transcrript of the case and i'll get back to you with exactly was was said. It's still not how we do things here in Sweden. The law is the law no matter religion or how rich your family is. And that's something i've been proud of living here. But this is wrong.
If you could, that would be great, because I am totally open to knowing what happened. I didn't see the bit that said she wasn't trusted because she was a woman. Her testimony was rejected, but, you know, that happens in legal cases.
Absolutely - everyone should be subject to the national legal process. No arguments there. And if this did not happen, I will condemn it as vehemently as anyone.
I still can't see where it is said that her opinion as a woman was questioned. I do understand some of the controversy here, but still, this seems like a legal issue. Sorry, Tony, but I still can't see anything that backs up your OP. I am at the mercy of Google Translate though.
This was the first article i found wich seems to have the most accurate translation of what happened. https://www.google.no/amp/s/sputniknews.com/amp/europe/201803061062278612-sweden-sharial-law/
I am not saying that this didn't happen - I do not know - but that's not a reliable source. It is a propagandist working on behalf of the Kremlin, with an obvious anti-western agenda.
Yeah i don't know about that sertain newspage, but here's the article from one of Swedens biggest newpage. https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/xR7yBV/solna-tingsratt-friade-make-i-misshandelsfall--for-han-var-av-god-fam
It's not anti imigrant propaganda. It's all over swedish media and swedens most respectable crimecase investigators is involved. The head responsible judge who ruled in favor of the husband is also a politician, so it's big news.
Having translated the page, it seems to me that this verdict was made via the legal system using legal processes. It calls into question the evidence and the testimony of the alleged victim, and it appears that this is the reason that the defendant was exonerated.
Her legal team have disputed this, and it is their job to do so, but I can't see anything in this story to say the defendant was exonerated because of an application of sharia law.
Perhaps justice has not been done here, but nothing you have produced here backs up the conclusions you have drawn in your OP.
For the record, I would be appalled if a woman was assaulted and this was not dealt with because of sharia law - anywhere, not just in a western country - but nothing I have seen here says that this has happened.
Well the fact that all evidence was layed aside, and the judges ruled in his favor becouse his family was better, and she was a woman and can't be trusted. I will try and get hold of the transcrript of the case and i'll get back to you with exactly was was said. It's still not how we do things here in Sweden. The law is the law no matter religion or how rich your family is. And that's something i've been proud of living here. But this is wrong.
If you could, that would be great, because I am totally open to knowing what happened. I didn't see the bit that said she wasn't trusted because she was a woman. Her testimony was rejected, but, you know, that happens in legal cases.
Absolutely - everyone should be subject to the national legal process. No arguments there. And if this did not happen, I will condemn it as vehemently as anyone.
Found a part of the transscript, the part where people reacted to the most, when the muslim judge lets her ruling go on what she belives, and not the facts. It's in swedish but it's from a page wich is about swedish law. http://www.dagensjuridik.se/2018/03/skandaldomen-kritiseras-hart-av-svenska-jurister-har-aldrig-sett-nagot-liknande-som-domare
I still can't see where it is said that her opinion as a woman was questioned. I do understand some of the controversy here, but still, this seems like a legal issue. Sorry, Tony, but I still can't see anything that backs up your OP. I am at the mercy of Google Translate though.