Conviction for Violation of the Duty of Care and Education

Facts

The appellant [A.X.] operates an agricultural business in [C.] . He lived there with his wife, their common children, and his stepson. From 21 January 2002 to 2 May 2005, his stepdaughter [Y.] also lived with the family. [A.X.] was accused of sexually abusing [Y.] , physically and verbally assaulting her, and forcing her to perform excessive work. The District Court of [C.] convicted [A.X.] of repeated violation of the duty of care and education within the meaning of Art. 219 SCC, but acquitted him of the other charges. The Cantonal Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden upheld this judgment.

Considerations

The Federal Court considers the conviction to be lawful. The Cantonal Court was allowed to base its decision on the statements of the victim, which were deemed credible, that the appellant had overburdened her with excessive work and physically and verbally abused her for years. This fulfilled the objective elements of Art. 219 SCC, as the appellant's conduct was capable of creating a concrete danger to the physical and mental development of the victim. The subjective elements of conditional intent were also affirmed, as the appellant must have realized that the…