The Court of Appeal of Rovaniemi dealt with what happened in September behind closed doors and now gave its verdict.

The abuse took place at the home of a 16-year-old boy in a northern Finnish town while the boy’s parents were away. The girl had visited the house before.

The boy wanted sex. The girl, on the other hand, had been unsure whether she would consent to intercourse. Finally he agreed.

According to the Court of Appeal, the boy did not actually pressure the girl, did not threaten or use violence. However, he influenced the girl’s will formation by inappropriate means.

A 16-year-old made a 13-year-old girl agree to sexual intercourse in a way that did not correspond to the child’s own will and violated her right to sexual self-determination.

Get out of the house right away

The connection was unprotected. According to the boy, the girl had told him that she was using birth control pills. However, the fact that the girl received postnatal contraception speaks against this.

Accused in the courtroom, the young man claimed that he had the girl when he was 14 years old. He deduced the age from the fact that he knew what class this was. The court’s position on the matter was that the accused should have taken into account the fact that the girl may still be 13 years old.

The girl found it very rude that only a few minutes after the sexual intercourse, the boy had told her to get dressed and leave the house. The boy was afraid that his parents would come home.

Four days after the incident, the girl tried to commit suicide.

He later filed a criminal complaint.

3,000 euros for suffering

The parties had a three-year age difference at the time of the crime. However, the girl was only 13 years old, so according to the Court of Appeal, the limitation rule cannot be applied in this case. The girl was nowhere near the legal age at the time of the act.

According to neither of them, the parties were dating. However, they knew each other from before. Intercourse took place on the third meeting.

The prosecutor later demanded that the adult teenager be punished for sexually abusing a child as a young person. The District Court accepted the indictment and the Rovaniemi Court of Appeal also came to the same conclusion.

The teenager’s punishment is nine months of suspended imprisonment.

The convicted person must compensate his victim for the suffering caused by the offense 3,000 euros plus interest from the date of the crime. In addition, he must compensate the teenage girl’s legal costs, which are a total of 3,426 euros.

According to the court, the father did not understand that he would not have to pay the rent. Illustration picture. Mostphotos

An approximately 90-year-old father sold his terraced house in Orimattila to his son in 2012. The purchase price was 37,000 euros, which the son paid his father.

However, according to the terms of the deed of sale, the father retained the lifetime right of possession of the apartment, where he still lived. The father and son agree that they will be responsible for the company consideration and other fees for the use of the apartment during their respective periods of ownership.

The day after the transaction, the father paid his son back 10,000 euros of the purchase price. According to the son, the father himself wanted to transfer part of the money back to him.

Can’t afford a funeral

The father continued to pay the housing company’s fees until February 2016. After that, the older man paid three separate bank transfers of 553.50 euros to his son’s account.

“Rent December, January and February” was written in the message field. Starting in March, the father paid his son 700 euros in rent for his own apartment once a month.

Already in 2015, the father had withdrawn 66,000 euros from his account as a check. According to the boy, this was about guaranteed rent payment.

The arrangement drove the elderly man into financial distress. After he died in 2018, the assets of the estate were not even enough for the funeral.

There was only about 1200 euros left in the account.

My mother’s account was also cleared

The other siblings began to suspect that their father had fallen victim to financial exploitation. One of the siblings obtained a power of attorney to secure the wealth of their divorced mother.

Mother suffered from a mild memory disorder and owned several apartments.

Later, the twin brother of the man accused of crimes obtained a new power of attorney. Soon after, 100,000 euros were withdrawn from the mother’s account.

According to the court, the man who previously emptied his father’s account was the main perpetrator in this operation as well.

Pre-inheritance

The twin brothers were both charged with crimes in the Päijät-Häme district court. One of them was only accused of aiding and abetting the aggravated embezzlement of the mother.

The 60-year-old boy accused of crimes against both his father and his mother told the Päijät-Häme district court that he was practically the only one of the children who was in contact with his father during his last years. He had been handling his father’s banking affairs since the 1990s.

He called the 100,000 euros taken from his mother’s account an advance inheritance.

Dad didn’t understand

The court considered that the elderly father was still legally competent when he returned a significant part of the purchase price of the apartment in 2012. The purpose was most obviously to favor and reward the boy who had helped him a lot.

In 2015, however, the father was no longer able to understand the terms of the deed of sale he had made earlier. Based on the evidence presented in the case, the district court considered that the father did not understand that he would not have to pay rent.

The son accused of gross fraud was also worried about his father’s memory. Already in 2015, he had proposed that the father should move to a service home. The father was worried that he would have to move out of his own home in accordance with his son’s wishes.

Judgments for twins

The district court found that the sixty-year-old boy had grossly taken advantage of his own father’s lack of understanding. In addition, it considered that there was no doubt in the case that the mother herself had made the decision to hand over the money to her sons.

The brother who took care of his father’s affairs was sentenced to a suspended prison sentence of 1 year and 6 months for aggravated fraud and aggravated embezzlement. In addition, he was ordered to compensate his father’s estate for the damage caused by the crime 84,265 euros with interest.

Another brother was sentenced to a 9-month suspended prison sentence for aiding and abetting aggravated embezzlement. Together with his twin brother, he was ordered to reimburse the 100,000 euros with interest withdrawn from his mother’s account.

The brothers appealed their sentence to the Court of Appeal of Eastern Finland, which did not change the sentence. The judgment of the district court therefore remains in force.