ROMA - Jeans are not a "chastity belt" that attempts to prevent someone from being able to touch the private parts of the wearer. For this you can configure the crime of sexual violence if a person tries to put his hand in the pants of another. This derives from the decision number 30403 of the Third Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court. The case concerns a girl of 16 years of the province of Padua who had repeatedly suffered "indecent" by the mother's partner. The man, 37 years of RP was sentenced by the Court of Appeal of Venice to a year in prison (under art. 609 with a suspended sentence and mitigating circumstances recognized) because many times "with violence, had committed acts of lust in against the 16 year old touching the breasts, hips, and sit in on private parts, coming in with his hands under the woman's pants. " Even the Court of Appeal of Venice had confirmed the ruling of the court of Padua reaffirming inter alia, that the victim's young age, on those occasions had not run away was not a provocation but the fact is at the discretion of conduct individual and emphasized that the donning of pants type 'jeans' not ruled out the touching of private parts, easily accessible without taking them off and still getting your hands into them. "The Court of Cassation upheld the ruling of Appeals considered reliable the findings of fact and emphasizing that "the fact that the girl was wearing jeans was not impediment to the touch inside the private parts, it is possible to instill it with his hand inside the garment, as this is not comparable to a kind of chastity belt .
SOURCE: www.libero.it
