The definition of the word "snip" became what set the man free.
The girl has described how the 50-year-old put his hand inside her panties.
According to the girl, "he held his hand on her neckline and had a finger in it", which Aftonbladet was the first to report.
The Court of Appeal for Western Sweden writes in the judgment that they believe the description of the event, but since the girl was not able to explain in more detail what is actually meant by the word "snip" it is, according to four out of five members of the court, "not to prove that the man penetrated her abdomen" .
The court refers to the Swedish dictionary which describes nipple as "female external genitalia".
That, together with the fact that the girl allegedly had difficulty explaining how far in the man's fingers were, means that it is not possible to prove that the man raped the girl, according to the Court of Appeal.
"Should not be a guessing game"
Agneta Carlquist was the girl's plaintiff's counsel at the trial in the district court.
She says she has never experienced anything like this before.
- It shouldn't be a guessing game.
It has serious consequences when the child is not allowed to explain himself.
There have been judgments in the past where the word snipe has been used and accepted.
The news has also received a lot of attention online and hundreds of posts on Twitter and Instagram have been shared under the hashtag #jagvetvadensnippaär.
The lawyer: "Further proof was needed"
Court of Appeal lawyer Åke Thimfors was one of the five who decided the sentence.
He believes that the material presented by the prosecutor was not sufficient for a conviction.
Thimfors says that in cases of rape against children, the questioning by the police takes place during the preliminary investigation and they are then played before the court, which does not have the opportunity to ask follow-up questions.
- In the material it was unclear what was meant by the word snipe and she did not get a clear follow-up question about what she meant or what she was supposed to describe.
So we only got these words and then it becomes important how it is interpreted, says Åke Thimfors.
- In all criminal cases there are very high evidentiary requirements.
You can't take chances, but it must be beyond reasonable doubt that the finger was inside the vagina.
Our assessment was that the prosecutor had needed to present additional evidence for a conviction, he says.