Female World Cup official flees Qatar to avoid a sentence of 100 lashes and seven years in jail for 'extramarital sex' after reporting that she was RAPED
• Paola Schietekat, 28, faces 100 lashes and seven years in jail for extramarital sex
• Mexican woman charged after she reported being raped while working in Qatar
• Lawyers told her she could possibly avoid a conviction by marrying her attacker
• The man, a colleague, allegedly broke into her apartment, threatening to kill her
• Schietekat, who has since left the Gulf state, was helping to organise World Cup

By LAUREN LEWIS FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 12:20, 22 February 2022 | UPDATED: 17:58, 22 February 2022

A female World Cup official is facing a sentence of 100 lashes and seven years in jail for 'extramarital sex' after she reported being raped while working in Qatar.

Paola Schietekat, 28, from Mexico, was working for the World Cup organising committee when she complained that she was raped by an associate who broke into her apartment and threatened to kill her.

She reported the June 6, 2021 attack to the Qatari authorities, who responded by accusing her of having an affair and charged her with 'extramarital sex', which is illegal in the Gulf state.

Schietekat was told by lawyers that one way of avoiding conviction was to marry her attacker but instead decided to flee the country, leaving behind what she called her 'dream job'.

The charges against Schietekat, who is a behavioural economist, are still valid and she is expected to be sentenced in absentia on March 6.


Paola Schietekat, 28, from Mexico, was working for the Qatar World Cup organising committee when she complained she was raped by an associate who broke into her apartment and threatened to kill her


Schietekat reported the June 6, 2021 attack to the Qatari authorities, which responded by accusing her of having an affair and charged her with 'extramarital sex', which is illegal in the Gulf state


Schietekat has claimed that Qatar, which will be the first Arab state to host the FIFA World Cup in November 2022, cares more about protecting the attacker than the rape victim

Schietekat, writing on Julio Astillero, explained the attacker was able to gain access to her apartment in Doha because it is common for residents to leave their doors unlocked and rely on the security of the building.

The man, who Schietekat said she considered a friend, allegedly managed to wrestle her to the floor and rape her, leaving her arms, shoulders and back covered in bruises.

Schietekat said she took pictures of the scene and documented what had happened on her phone before fleeing her home and spending the night in a hotel, fearing her attacker would return.

The following morning she got a medical certificate and, with an official from the Mexican consul in Doha, reported the alleged rape to Qatari police using her limited Arabic.

Police asked whether she wanted a restraining order against the attacker or to press criminal charges against him.

Schietekat told police she wanted to press charges and signed a statement in Arabic to the effect, giving officers the name and details of the man.

However, hours later, around 9pm, she was called and told to return to the station where she was put in front of the man she had accused and questioned for three hours in Arabic.

The alleged attacker had told police that he and Schietekat were in a relationship, so officers asked to look at her phone to find evidence of intimacy, which she denied.

Police then asked her to undergo a virginity test, accusing Schietekat of extramarital relations, before recommending the case to the public prosecutor's office to bring charges against her.


The charges against Schietekat, who is a behavioural economist, are still valid and she is expected to be sentenced in absentia on March 6 (pictured, Al-Rayyan Stadium where some Qatar 2022 matches will be played)


Schietekat was told by lawyers that one way of avoiding conviction was to marry her attacker but instead decided to flee the country, leaving behind what she called her 'dream job' organising the World Cup

Her attacker was acquitted on charges of assault because 'there were no cameras pointing directly at the door of the apartment, so there was no way to verify that the assault happened', Schietekat said.

She was then warned by lawyers that one of the only ways to avoid a conviction would be to marry her alleged attacker.

Schietekat chose to flee the country instead, leaving behind what she later described as her 'dream job' and was helped out of Doha by the World Cup committee.

'I had never breathed with more relief than when my passport was stamped,' she wrote. 'In Mexico the adrenaline stopped and a slower process began, although just as complex and painful.'

She has since claimed that Qatar, which will be the first Arab state to host the FIFA World Cup in November 2022, cares more about protecting the attacker than the rape victim.

She also revealed she was previously raped when she was 17 but that she did not speak out about the ordeal at the time, as she explained why she chose to go public with the allegation.

Schietekat has spoken out over the ordeal, telling El Pais: 'The heart of the matter isn't what we can or cannot do on the Qatari laws, as Qatar is a sovereign state. We won't be able to change it, but the valences of Mexican institutions is something that can get better and that we can demand it as a society.'

The 28-year-old accused the 'cynical' international community of continuing to back Gulf states embroiled in allegations of 'flagrant human rights abuses'.

'Without a firm stance on the part of the international community, draconian, retrograde and even absurd laws will find a little hole to continue justifying themselves, in the shadow of major sporting or cultural events,' she wrote.

She also attacked the Mexican foreign ministry for failing to protect its 600 citizens living in Qatar, especially against gender-based violence.

Since publishing her account, Schietekat has met with Mexico's Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard who announced the state would provide her with legal representation 'ensuring that all her rights as a Mexican citizen are respected.'

Qatar has been embroiled in scandals as the World Cup approaches, with reports of thousands of migrant workers dying in the country since it was awarded the tournament in 2010 and stinging criticism of the government's human rights record.


Qatar has been embroiled in scandals as the World Cup approaches, with reports of thousands of migrant workers dying in the country since it was awarded the tournament in 2010 and stinging criticism of the government's human rights record

MufasaLion:


Well, she's committed a crime and she should go and face the wrath of law. According to the court, there is no evidence of the attack, so it's understandable why the accused rapist was discharged and acquitted.

Anyways, Qatar is not at fault and they've done what was expected according to their rule of law. Although, if the crime was truly committed but no evidence to prove it, I sympathize with her and hope she finds peace.

I look forward to watching the 2022 World Cup in good health and peace of mind!

OLAADEGBU:


Are you serious or you are just joking?

immortalcrown:


Chai! This sounds disheartening. For people who actually got raped and left with no substantial evidence, Only God can console them. Women that raise false alarms for rape have made it difficult for rape claims to be believed without very substantial evidence. This is exactly what happened in this woman's case.

immortalcrown:


But logically, I will support the court ruling. She made the case more unbelievable by saying the man broke into her apartment. If he broke into the apartment, there will be cracks on her door or windows. Her claim would have been more believable if she did not say he broke into her apartment.

Mastakija:


Na rape that gender dey use get attention now

MufasaLion:


I made my comment based on no sentiment, nor emotional attachment. It was also not about gender.

Qatar has done what was required.

OLAADEGBU:


Qatar should not be hosting the world Cup. Period.

OLAADEGBU:


What planet are you living on? Didn't you read it in the OP that she had the evidence on her phone and that she did a medical test? What other substantial evidence are you looking for?

OLAADEGBU:
What planet are you living on? Didn't you read it in the OP that she had the evidence on her phone and that she did a medical test? What other substantial evidence are you looking for?

immortalcrown:

Try to pay attention to both the post and my comment. The woman said the rape happened on the floor of her apartment. She said she recorded the scene. The question you should ask yourself is if cracks on a door or window are part of what she recorded. Did you not read the part that says no camera evidence of how the man entered the apartment?

MufasaLion:


Dude, stop arguing blindly!

"The alleged attacker had told police that he and Schietekat were in a relationship, so officers asked to look at her phone to find evidence of intimacy, which she denied.

Police then asked her to undergo a virginity test, accusing Schietekat of extramarital relations, before recommending the case to the public prosecutor's office to bring charges against her."

cococandy:


So you support a virginity test as proof of/against rape?
Does this make sense to you?

MufasaLion:


Dude, stop arguing blindly!

MufasaLion:


"The alleged attacker had told police that he and Schietekat were in a relationship, so officers asked to look at her phone to find evidence of intimacy, which she denied.

MufasaLion:


Police then asked her to undergo a virginity test, accusing Schietekat of extramarital relations, before recommending the case to the public prosecutor's office to bring charges against her."

immortalcrown:


Try to pay attention to both the post and my comment. The woman said the rape happened on the floor of her apartment. She said she recorded the scene. The question you should ask yourself is if cracks on a door or window are part of what she recorded. Did you not read the part that says no camera evidence of how the man entered the apartment?

Schietekat said she took pictures of the scene and documented what had happened on her phone before fleeing her home and spending the night in a hotel, fearing her attacker would return.

The following morning she got a medical certificate and, with an official from the Mexican consul in Doha, reported the alleged rape to Qatari police using her limited Arabic.

OLAADEGBU:

Below is an excerpt of what she said in the article:
Take note of the underlined phrases and come back to tell us whether she had substantial evidence or not.

immortalcrown:


Does any part of this your excerpt say there is a video evidence of the man breaking into her apartment? Does the excerpt say the scene she recorded includes the man breaking into her apartment or the damages the man caused on her door or window?

immortalcrown:


You are yet to understand the logic of the court ruling. The man did not deny having sex with her. He only denied using physical force for the sex. The lady only snapped the bruises on her body and maybe objects scattered on her floor. Rape is not the only thing that can cause bruises of scatter objects. Also, pay attention to my comment. I never said he did not rape her. And I never said he raped her. I said that in a situation like that, only God, the victim and the accused know the truth because there is no substantial evidence for mortal third parties.

OLAADEGBU:
Does any part of the excerpt also say there was no video evidence of the man breaking into her apartment? Since she did not release her phone we cannot say other than she had the evidence recorded in her phone. Why should it be the lady that has to release her phone? Did they ask for evidence from the man who claimed to be in a relationship? If there was a relationship the man should be able to release the evidence from his phone since it takes two to tango. Even if was proved that they were in a relationship does that give the green light for him to rape?

OLAADEGBU:
What court ruling? What rule of law is Qatar abiding by, Sharia? Under Sharia the testimony of a man is worth twice if not more than that of a single lady. A single lady has no leg to stand on in such cases. Are you also aware that the lady got a medical certificate as evidence of rape? Are you also aware that she was told to do a virginity test? What has virginity test go to do with the case of rape? Are they saying that if you are not a virgin you cannot possibly be raped? This is jungle justice and a country like this should not be hosting the World Cup.

immortalcrown:


"Her attacker was acquitted on charges of assault because 'there were no cameras pointing directly at the door of the apartment, so there was no way to verify that the assault happened', Schietekat said."

immortalcrown:


"The following morning she got a medical certificate and, with an official from the Mexican consul in Doha, reported the alleged rape to Qatari police using her limited Arabic. "

This statement is not specific about the result of the medical test. The statement is vague. She might have done the test to prove her health status before the rape so that if she later have symptoms of STDs, she will suspect the man. Nobody will read the sentence and say the medical test is to prove the rape. If she did the test to prove the rape, the sentence does not make it clear.

OLAADEGBU:
Was there no other means of verifying whether the attack took place? What happened to the woman's side of the story? What happened to what she documented on her phone? What about the medical test she did after the incident? This is why I insist that third world countries are not ripe to host the World Cup because of this kind of mentality and jungle justice.

OLAADEGBU:
Since you don't know the result of the medical test why go into making assumptions? Do you know that medical test can show the DNA of the attacker? Hair of the man will also be recovered and the sperm. If no effort was made to use these other forms of evidence but to ask for a ridiculous evidence of a virginity test shows how far behind you and the primitive Qatar is from the advanced world we are living in.

immortalcrown:


You are just trying to force your sentiment on me. One, the woman has her side of the story and the man has his own side of the story. Two, I did not say the rape happened and I did not say the rape did not happen. What exactly is your point against my comment? What she documented on her phone can be caused by rape or by anything else. Rape is not the only thing that can cause bruises on skin. Rape is not the only thing that can scatter things in a house. What she recorded on her phone does not show the man beating her or sexing her. So, the court was being careful. You are just using your sentiment to sound as if I am against the woman. Neither the woman nor the man has my support because I did not witness the incident. Only God, the woman and the man know the truth. All I know is that the court has not done anything that is logically wrong. A medical test can show the man had sex with her. But no medical test can show if the sex was forceful or peaceful. A medical test can show the DNA of a man that sexed a woman. But no medical test can show the sex style used by the man.

immortalcrown:


My assumption about the test is not an offense at all. I just said the article did not clarify the test result. My saying the test could be to hold the man accountable if the woman later suffers STDs is to prove to you that the test might be to prove the rape or to confirm something else. Did I say the test cannot be to prove the rape? I just said the statement is not specific about the purpose of the test. You are the one crossing boundaries in your own assumption. Everything I said is justified by the post itself. Your assertion that the test proved the rape happened cannot be justified by any sentence in the post.

OLAADEGBU:
Did you know that countries ruled by Sharia laws do not regard the testimony of single women? Are you aware that women are considered as second class citizens? Once a woman claims to have been violated the best thing to do is to give her the benefit of the doubt and hear her out but instead they decided to sentence her with 100 lashes and 7 years jail time. Where in a sane world will they come to such a conclusion? They are even attempting to judge her in her absence.

OLAADEGBU:
I don't blame you for jumping to such assumptions because you are only a product of your environment. Medical tests could verify if one had been violently violated but if a system is already set up against you that they are now asking for a ridiculous virgin test result then you should know that that environment is not for you to live or work in except that you have been brought to accept abuse as a way of life.

immortalcrown:

You are going outside what is in the post. I limited my points to what is in the post. What do you mean by benefit of doubt? Did the post say the woman was not allowed to tell her own side of the story? Why do you insinuate they did not hear her out?


You probably do not understand English well. My assumption was not an assertion. My assumption was not a claim against the woman. My assumption is just to help explain that the post sounds ambiguous about the test.

I have tried my best to educate you. I may ignore your next responses. You keep saying what you cannot prove. Where and when did I ask for a virgin test result? Can you point it out?

Police asked whether she wanted a restraining order against the attacker or to press criminal charges against him.

Schietekat told police she wanted to press charges and signed a statement in Arabic to the effect, giving officers the name and details of the man.

However, hours later, around 9pm, she was called and told to return to the station where she was put in front of the man she had accused and questioned for three hours in Arabic.

The alleged attacker had told police that he and Schietekat were in a relationship, so officers asked to look at her phone to find evidence of intimacy, which she denied.

Police then asked her to undergo a virginity test, accusing Schietekat of extramarital relations, before recommending the case to the public prosecutor's office to bring charges against her.

OLAADEGBU:
I think comprehension seems to be your issue here. Once again I leave with this excerpt and see if you can see my point but if not I leave to have the last say.

immortalcrown:

You are just trying to force your sentiment on me. One, the woman has her side of the story and the man has his own side of the story. Two, I did not say the rape happened and I did not say the rape did not happen. What exactly is your point against my comment? What she documented on her phone can be caused by rape or by anything else. Rape is not the only thing that can cause bruises on skin. Rape is not the only thing that can scatter things in a house. What she recorded on her phone does not show the man beating her or sexing her. So, the court was being careful. You are just using your sentiment to sound as if I am against the woman. Neither the woman nor the man has my support because I did not witness the incident. Only God, the woman and the man know the truth. All I know is that the court has not done anything that is logically wrong. A medical test can show the man had sex with her. But no medical test can show if the sex was forceful or peaceful. A medical test can show the DNA of a man that sexed a woman. But no medical test can show the sex style used by the man.



.

NoToPile:
You are saying forceful/violent penetration cannot be determined medically?
So what do you think was in the medical report?
Why do you think she went to the hospital.
You people should fear God Na.
Anyway too much rape apologists on NL so not surprised, the country it happened doesn't even help matters.