Facts
Parties:
- Appellant: [X.] , represented by attorney Kenad Melunovic
- Respondent: Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Solothurn
- Respondent: [Y.] , represented by attorney Dr. Corinne Saner
Facts:
On April 11, 2012, [X.] filed a complaint against [Y.] with the Solothurn Cantonal Police for sexual harassment, possibly sexual coercion. On May 4, 2012, she filed a complaint for sexual coercion and attempted rape with the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Solothurn. The Public Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal investigation against [Y.] on May 14, 2012.
By order of August 30, 2012, the Public Prosecutor's Office found [Y.] guilty of sexual harassment and imposed a fine of CHF 500.--. [X.] filed an appeal against the order. The Public Prosecutor's Office partially dismissed the proceedings for sexual coercion and attempted rape on February 15, 2013, and ordered the continuation of the proceedings for sexual harassment. [X.] filed an appeal against the partial dismissal order, which the Higher Court of the Canton of Solothurn dismissed on June 5, 2013.
Subject matter:
The appeal concerns the partial dismissal of the proceedings for sexual coercion and attempted rape as well as the application of Art. 319 para. 1 CrimPC.
Considerations
The lower court confirmed the partial dismissal of the proceedings for sexual coercion and attempted rape, stating that the required intensity of coercion under Art. 189 and Art. 190 SCC was lacking. The appellant had not been rendered incapable of resistance, making a conviction for sexual coercion and attempted rape less likely than an acquittal.
The appellant argued that the partial dismissal order and the order were based on the same factual circumstances and that the dismissal of the prosecution of individual offenses, which are in imperfect concurrence with each other, was inadmissible.
The…