Germany: 22yo Afghan Child Rapist Gets Only 2-Yrs Jail Due to 'Severe Detention Sensitivity'

It was an especially heinous crime that was taking place end of March in an asylum home in Boostedt (Schleswig-Holstein). There, Jama B. (22) had a four year old boy follow him to the bathroom. Once inside, doors locked, he pushed his erect penis into the mouth of the child and then ejaculated (outside the mouth).

Shortly thereafter the man was caught, still with his pants down, by the boy’s father. The alarmed security service immediately called police, they arrested the Afghan. A second man, Sohrab S. (29) who guarded the door during the incident, was arrested as well.

During the following court trial Jama B. bragged that he was a famous man in Afghanistan. “I am a superstar, a singer.” That his personality is not the one of a man who is be capable of what he’s accused of. Furthermore he tells that he had a lot of alcohol before the incident, but that he was in control of himself. He did not show any remorse in court.

Thursday the county court delivered judgment: two years and four months incarceration for severe sexual abuse for Jama B., his accused accomplice was free to go.

This is a judgment that has made people speechless. And it prompts a lot of questions. BILD is asking the people responsible:

A man sticks his penis into the mouth of a child. Why is this “only” severe sexual abuse – and not rape?

Chief prosecutor Alex Bieler tells BILD: “A rape is only then punished when it had been committed under the threat of violence, or violence was used. This is not what we are seeing in this case. It is often enough with children when one gives them clear instructions – such as ‘take it in your mouth’. Therefore the offender was persecuted for “only” severe sexual abuse of a child. But on a grander scale it doesn’t really matter, since with a rape the minimum sentence is two years, the highest sentence is 15 years.”

Why such a lenient punishment

Karin Witt, spokesperson for the county court Kiel: “The court couldn’t conclude any other severe reasons such as prior convictions. Mitigating circumstances were concluded due to the defendant’s alcohol consumption and his severe detention sensitivity: He is young, he doesn’t speak german, and he has already been attacked once while in custody. The victim has gotten over the incident well, there are no serious consequences to be expected.”

Why was the accomplice acquitted?

Sohrab B. was acquitted due to lack of evidence. It was not possible to prove that he aided and abetted the severe sexual abuse, says presiding judge Stefan Becker. The chamber therefore gave, due to a of lack of evidence, “the benefit of the doubt for the accused”.

How is the boy today?

Attorney Peter Boysen who represented the family of the child: “It was a single incident that didn’t last very long either, and hopefully it will not harm the child in the long run. Therefore there was no reason for us to complain about the verdict, even if we could maybe have gotten him another half year. I have therefore advised the parents not to file an appeal against the verdict. The boy is doing good today, but he is still in therapeutic treatment of a child- and youth psychiatric clinic. The family is happy to not be living in the asylum home anymore. They now live in their own apartment in Northern Germany.

Will the offender be deported now?

The verdict is not yet final, the chief prosecutor and defense are currently looking at a revision. Only then can the offender’s refugee status be revoked and he can be deported.