Case Background

Xiao De and Xiao Yi had a long-term ambiguous relationship and engaged in intimate relations multiple times over a certain period. Due to differences in personality and values, Xiao De never confirmed the relationship with Xiao Yi and sought an opportunity to end their interactions. During the 2020 pandemic outbreak, with society advocating isolation and maintaining social distance, Xiao De gradually withdrew from the relationship. Unexpectedly, two years later, Xiao De received a notification from the police and prosecutors, accused of obstructing sexual autonomy, and urgently sought our firm's assistance.

Prosecutor's Office: Decision Not to Prosecute

Upon investigation by our firm, it was found that according to Xiao Yi's statements to the police and prosecutors, the incident occurred in 2017. However, Xiao De and Xiao Yi only began to distance themselves after 2020, during which their interactions were normal. Typically, in stranger sexual assault cases, the circumstances are relatively straightforward. However, in cases involving allegations of sexual assault among acquaintances, numerous background issues must be considered, such as the degree of familiarity, age difference, education level, health status, mental condition, daily interactions, motivations for sexual conduct (curiosity, monetary gain, flattery, temptation, pleasing, excitement, revenge), the reasonableness of the methods used, the appropriateness of the time and place of the incident by societal standards, the chances of seeking help during the assault, the changes in the relationship afterward, the presence of post-traumatic stress symptoms, the timing of reporting (immediate, soon after, or delayed), whether the report was made voluntarily or passively, the influence of others, and the cooperation or resistance of the opposing parties to lie detector tests and their results. These factors must be comprehensively judged based on objective experiential and logical rules according to current social norms to avoid deviating from the public's sense of justice. Given the difficulty in providing evidence in matters between men and women, the victim's reaction after the event, the degree of familiarity, and daily interactions are important for inferring whether implicit consent was present during the intimate behavior with the defendant.
In this case, Xiao Yi's single accusation without any other objective evidence to prove the existence of criminal behavior made it highly dubious in nature, making it hard to believe as true. With our firm’s rigorous defense arguments, the prosecutor’s office ultimately decided not to prosecute, thus restoring Xiao De’s legal justice.
 

Reference：Supreme Court 108th Year Tai Shang Zi No. 626 Judgment、Supreme Court 108th Year Tai Shang Zi No. 626 Judgment