Share

Butt slapping is sexual assault, but not always

The Cassation established that to avoid confusion with "accidental touching" the duration of the pressure must be considered: the hand must remain resting "for an appreciable period of time" - The conviction of a carabiniere has been confirmed.

Butt slapping is sexual assault, but not always

Is a pat on the butt sexual assault? Yes, but only if the hand remains resting "for an appreciable amount of time". It is the chronological criterion that distinguishes harassment from "accidental brushing". This was established by a sentence of the Court of Cassation.

The issue has been controversial for some time. In the past, the quick hand on the buttock was not always considered a crime if "isolated, sudden" and "without lust", but now the Supreme Court has introduced a new variable to take into consideration: the duration. The judges therefore upheld the sentence against a carabiniere whose hand, evidently, had been neither sudden nor devoid of lust.

In detail, the Cassation rejected the soldier's appeal, considering the motivation contained in the sentence issued by the Court of Appeal of Perugia to be convincing. The carabiniere tried to argue that the holster of the ordinance pistol would have come into contact with the woman's buttock. But the victim had no doubts: no holster, that was a hand. And the pressure was "maintained for an appreciable time".

Consequently, the appeals judge had no doubts “about the existence of the subjective element of the disputed offence”. It is an important detail, because according to the jurisprudence on sexual violence "sexual acts should be considered those which are capable of compromising the free determination of a person's sexuality or of invading the sexual sphere in ways characterized by coercion, deceptive impersonation, abuse of physical or mental inferiority, in them being able to include also the insidious and rapid ones, which concern erogenous zones of a non-consenting person".

And yet, it seems that even the latest sentence of the Cassation is not able to close the question once and for all. Too many questions remain unanswered: What is an "appreciable" period of time? Who can ever measure it? And then "appreciable" for whom? For the abuser or for the victim? But above all… If the decisive criterion is duration, should we infer that quick pats, like hit and run, are allowed?

comments