UK woman loses jail term appeal after killing man as he sexually assaulted her
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/09/uk-woman-loses-jail-term-appeal-after-killing-man-as-he-sexually-assaulted-her
by Chanson_Riders
UK woman loses jail term appeal after killing man as he sexually assaulted her
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/09/uk-woman-loses-jail-term-appeal-after-killing-man-as-he-sexually-assaulted-her
by Chanson_Riders
43 comments
Jesus. So what was she supposed to do let it happen and hope he didn’t kill her?
There’s a reason why women feel they need to defend themselves, the justice system already failed her once.
I feel for her.
I try not to be angry at every arrest I disagree with but if you’re raping someone and you get killed by them, I can’t think of anything fairer (besides not being a rapist, obviously).
Plus, suggesting she shouldn’t have a knife on her for protection is laughable in the face of the circumstances.
Wow. A tiny minority of men get convicted for rape or sexual assault and then she gets a 17 year sentence for acting in self defence. It’s like the criminal justice system is terrified of any rapist seeing consequences for their actions.
>Sentencing her at Cambridge crown court in 2019, Judge Farrell QC told Ogonowska that Jaskiewicz “undoubtedly touched you sexually and was violent to you shortly before he was killed”. But he said it did not qualify as self-defence because Ogonowska, who he accepted suffered from some mental disability and had experienced previous trauma, had taken a knife to the scene.
>During the trial, the court heard that Ogonowska had suffered PTSD as a result of having been raped in 2015 when she was 14. Her alleged rapist was not prosecuted and, at her own trial, Farrell accepted the prosecution’s account – relying partly on Facebook messages between Ogonowska and her alleged attacker – that the intercourse was consensual, despite her age.
What a tragic case. 17 years seems incredibly harsh
>Judge Farrell QC told Ogonowska that Jaskiewicz “undoubtedly touched you sexually and was violent to you shortly before he was killed”. But he said it did not qualify as self-defence because Ogonowska, who he accepted suffered from some mental disability and had experienced previous trauma, had taken a knife to the scene.
Our laws are a fucking joke
I’ll be honest – this sounds like more of a push-back for her carrying a knife and using it.
Carrying a weapon and using it to kill is why she has such a large sentence. What she did isn’t proportional to what she experienced – in the eyes of the law at very least.
What a shit situation to be in.
Horrible read. So she is condemned because she carried a knife, which she only carried due to the fear of being raped which it appears was a fear that was accurate and almost came true.
If it was an unreasonable fear I could understand, or if she was allowed to carry some form of non lethal protection then sure the knife is too much, but it seems based on her experiences and what happened that having a knife was the exact necessity for her.
I feel that there should be a law where if someone dies or is injured while in the prosecution of a violent crime (put to a jury, threshold beyond a reasonable doubt), there can be no liability to any third party.
Imagine taking reasonable steps to protect yourself and being sentenced for nearly 2 decades because of it.
The amount of bent judges in this country man
It’s an awful case, and it’s hard not to be sympathetic to her.
But, when you review the facts, it’s pretty clear she reacted way over the top, out of anger, as opposed to any real semblance of self defense.
The original report states they were in a car with friends, after he’d previously physically assaulted her. he tried to touch her breasts, she responded by showing him the knife (to threaten him), and then seemingly chose to use it.
Guy was a nasty, violent, piece of work who needed locking up. That doesn’t translate to being able to stab him in the heart in a rage
Lots of people advocating for carrying a weapon around as long as its for self defence. I wonder if that could be exploited somehow.
It’s a tough thing but we can’t allow essentially vigilant justice to rule.
We have a hard enough time trying to figure out if private acts behind closed doors are consensual or not, it’ll be just as difficult as proving if murdering someone was a proportional use of force
17 YEARS, when rapists get 3 or 4 if your lucky and they actually get sentenced. Why does society hate women? She did the world a favour
I get that they don’t want to encourage people to carry knives and we’re going through whole huge campaigns against carrying knives (although I do feel for this woman who has already been through trauma) – but honestly, considering so many weapons that could be used for self-defence are illegal, it really feels like we’re supposed to just accept getting raped and hope justice will come out of it (or, y’know, the person doing it doesn’t kill you after). I can’t fight off the average dude with my body alone, and I guess I have to hope there’s a conveniently placed broken bottle or something nearby where he grabbed me?
She was supposed to just let him rape her. Duh. I hate this world sometimes.
The missing details are that she stabbed him in anger as revenge for his behaviour. She wasn’t actively fighting him off and she made no significant attempt to leave the situation as an alternative to stabbing him.
Judge Farrell said Ogonowska “became annoyed – you wanted attention and showed him the knife” she had been carrying over the course of the evening.
“You then, in anger, deliberately stabbed him intending to cause him at the very least really serious bodily harm,” he told her.
So we’ve got a country where rape prosecutions are so rare that rape is basically decriminalised, but defending yourself against a rapist gets you 17 years.
Great. Good work everyone.
Any weapon of defence for women in this country is illegal and carries a harsher sentence than the sexual assault/rape. So what can women do in a society that struggles to punish rapists legally, and has high levels of crime?
I read the article and appreciate the mitigating factors mentioned.
We need context and evidence, stop the rumors and the gossips.
17 years is too high.
I get the judges logic by carrying a knife with intent, it is murder, but the circumstances should have been greater mitigation.
I think 7-10 years would have been fairer. He’s dead so that’s him. She’s out in 5 but will hopefully not carry a knife in future.
We aren’t allowed to carry any weapons in this country. What was she supposed to do?!
>the pair returned to the car, where he “started to be aggressive towards me again” and tried to touch her breasts.
>Judge Farrell said Ogonowska “became annoyed – you wanted attention and showed him the knife” she had been carrying over the course of the evening.
>”You then, in anger, deliberately stabbed him intending to cause him at the very least really serious bodily harm,” he told her.
In police interview she said she “forgot” she was holding the knife, and called the murder an “accident”.
Theguardian needs to be banned tbh, just lies by omission all the time.
To find her guilty of carrying a weapon: sure. To find that the use of force exceeded that considered “reasonable” by virtue of using the illegally carried weapon: sure.
But to say that the defence of “self-defence” is wholly lost to her because of the knife is to ignore the basic common sense reading that this was, in fact, self-defence.
I posted this article as the report strongly suggested that Ogonowska killed the man during a sexual assault.
It now appears this wasn’t the case.
She carried a knife for protection due to previous trauma. The judge doesn’t accept that this trauma arose from a previous sexual assault as she claimed.
There was an argument with her drunk victim. He pulled over. A brief assault occurred against her. He did, or at least attempted to, grab her breast. Another argument ensued. During the course of this, she produced the knife and stabbed him once in the heart, killing him.
A tragic case all round. She had a challenging life, was bullied, had few friends, struggled with the language, and had probably experienced a previous sexual assault.
I was confused as to how she couldn’t have been found guilty of the lesser offence of manslaughter given the apparent circumstances, but another article which included the judge’s remarks clarified what took place.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/live-updates-judge-sentencing-murderer-16179800
That sentence is disgusting. She should be given a pat on the back and a medal for ridding the streets of one sick predator!
Fucking hell.
So I suppose she should’ve just let him do what he liked and hope he didn’t do anything else?
Honestly, I’d say she shouldn’t be in jail at all for defending herself.
This is the state of the country, be raped and accept it is the message here
Some important info about her history,
“Martyna Ogonowska was convicted of the murder of Filip Jaskiewicz on 21 October 2018. She was just 18 at the time of the offence. Martyna and Jaskiewicz had met only a few days earlier, introduced by a mutual friend. Following a night out with friends, Martyna stabbed Jaskiewicz once to the chest whilst he violently and sexually assaulted her. She had previously been raped by an older man when aged only 14 and had developed severe post-traumatic stress disorder as a consequence of this rape. ”
What happened on the day,
“Earlier in the evening, Martyna, went to a local nightclub with her two friends, Peter and Zofie. At the end of the evening, all four got into Jaskiewicz’s vehicle who had offered them a lift home.
Jaskiewicz started to drive at speed whilst highly intoxicated, in a way that frightened the other passengers. They repeatedly asked him to stop, but he did not. They did not know where he was driving to, and this scared them. Martyna was in tears. He drove in this manner for nearly two hours before eventually stopping the vehicle.
As soon as he did, Martyna got out of the vehicle and attempted to get away. Jaskiewicz chased her, grabbed her by the throat, shook her, and threw her to the ground. He attempted to sexually assault her until her two friends intervened. They considered walking home but did not know where they were. Martyna was persuaded that Jaskiewicz could be calmed down and so they decided to return to the vehicle.
However, once back in the car. Jaskiewicz grabbed Maryna’s breast under her top and he put his hand on her thigh. He slapped her in the face as she resisted these advances, physically removing his hand, but he was not deterred. Martyna then stabbed him in the chest with a small kitchen knife that her friend had given her to protect herself.
Following the stabbing, Martyna wanted to call an ambulance but her friends discouraged her. Instead she called her ex-boyfriend who arranged a taxi to bring them back to his address. The following morning she handed herself into the police, providing the knife and her clothing. Police describe her eyes as swollen from tears when she handed herself in.”
https://www.justiceforwomen.org.uk/martyna-ogonowska
Ah yes, basically give the green light to all predators in this country that victims aren’t allowed to defend themselves, good job Britain
I get downvoted and insulted every time I say this but this is another perfect example.
When it comes to “human rights” the right to self defence should be number 1.
Women should have the right to protect themselves from violence.
If a rapist doesn’t want to get stabbed with by his victim he just needs to not rape people.
If a rape victim doesn’t want to be raped she has to just hope she isn’t in the wrong place at the wrong time.
“But rapists and other criminals will just start carrying weapons”
They already are. The laws as they exist stop people carrying things for their own protection but criminals who don’t care about laws will keep using them anyway.
> During the trial, the court heard that Ogonowska had suffered PTSD as a result of having been raped in 2015 when she was 14. Her alleged rapist was not prosecuted and, at her own trial, Farrell accepted the prosecution’s account – relying partly on Facebook messages between Ogonowska and her alleged attacker – that the intercourse was consensual, despite her age.
Can’t be consensual if she can’t consent, and as a society we’ve decided minors cannot consent.
Hate on the US all we want but this lady would be praised over there
So [one woman](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxz2r2vyrzo) deliberately drugs up a 9 yo and leaves him without shoes in the woods to freeze to death. The kid is miraculously saved but gets brain damage. The woman walks free ’cause “she had taken steps to deal with her issues”.
Another woman stabs a rapist who “undoubtedly touched [her] sexually and was violent to [her] shortly before he was killed” and gets a life sentence.
Make it make sense, please.
I’m sorry, I’ve heard so much about how women need to be protected from the trans over the past year or so, but when a woman protects herself against a rapist she’s sentenced to jail for longer than any rapist gets sentenced?
And that’s if the rapist does get sentenced, the last time it happened to her her rapist just got a slap on the wrist.
I’m hoping Kier and others stand on business and advocate for this women’s release.
Carrying a Knife is intent to use it, preemptively.
That’s why she’s sentenced so harshly, do I think it’s bollocks as she was being raped, Yes, yes it is.
Fuck that guy and fuck the system.
Should she still serve a sentence for carrying a Knife with intent to use it, yes she should.
She could have bought pepper spray for the same money and likely wouldn’t have received the murder charge.
So someone went out armed and then deliberately stabbed someone, in circumstances where the jury rejected a claim that it could be considered self defence?
The headline looks like The Guardian triggering its readers. Maybe another newspaper will spin it as immigrants coming over here and stabbing people?
the headline is misleading and the article only has the info that the guy had touched her before she stabbed him in a car “not self defence as she brought a knife to the scene”
According to the court’s judgment, the man put his hand on the woman’s thigh and the woman responded by stabbing him in the heart with a knife. Granted the man had been violent towards her previously, and that she was herself a victim, but she clearly went far beyond the use of reasonable force in self-defence. The verdict was correct.
Whether her sentence is proportionate is another matter.
There’s some dodgy details here I think people are missing. This wasn’t some random attack, they were known to each other and were inside his car at the time of the attack.
She has every opportunity to try and leave, to do anything, to leverage the 3rd person on the scene to help. She immediately stabbed him in the heart with a pretty significant knife.
This wasn’t some poor 18 year old girl being chased into an alleyway. This was an adult willingly escalating the situation and taking someone’s life scarily quickly.
The sentence is deserved imo, there’s never a reason to carry a weapon and it nearly always makes situations worse. It escalates, and often results in worse outcomes for everyone.
Lord justice my arse.
They just gave a guy that raped a minor boy and girl repeatedly 6.5 years but when women hear shit like that and choose to protect themselves it’s 17 years.
Someone check that rat in a wigs browser history
a jury of peers who heard all the facts of the case decided that the killing was not proportionate.. I don’t see any reason the jury would have been biased **against** a SA victim
Lawful does not always mean just.
This is how societies collapse eventually I believe.
And Tony Martin shot a fleeing burglar in the back without a valid firearms licence and only got three years on appeal. This is an absolute fucking travesty.
Comments are closed.