Not a technicality, read my post at 36
“...the court’s president Thomas Philipp calling the verdict ‘watertight’ when it came to the sexual assault of a child, but that rape could not be sufficiently proved.”
Hopefully they mean that rape (lack of consent) WAS not proven, rather than COULD not be proven. I think so, otherwise there would not be a re-trial.
They will drag the victim through another proceeding, but I doubt that the perp will get away something this heinous, after basically confessing. It sounds to me like they are just crossing all the t’s and dotting all the i’s.
He is still convicted of sexual assault of a child, and the rape will probably stick on re-trial.
What is missing though, is the full-blooded outrage that this should inspire. Maybe if the boy was the son of a rich Autrian, they would get a bit more worked up.
Male homosexual pedophilia (pederasty) is sadly quite common in a lot of islamic societies today. Young boys for sex have always made up a significant chunk of the muslim slave trade. There are also boy prostitutes in those societies as well.