> - first, which jurisdictions in Europe would consolidate 30 rapes into a single rape count?

The Wikipedia link I mentioned says "In many other countries only a single offence would be counted in such a situation.[23][13][24][15][16]"

I verified the first three of those:

[23] is by "Klara Selin, a sociologist at the National Council for Crime Prevention in Stockholm", and it seems you've decided that is not a reputable source.

[13] says: "Other countries may employ more restrictive methods of counting. In extreme cases only a single offence will be counted, and this seems to be the situation in at least 16 European countries according the Council of Europe’s presentation (Council of Europe 1999:1.C.1.1)."

[24] gives an example of how Sweden differ from Norway and Denmark: "Furthermore, if a woman is subjected to repeated rapes during the same day by the same perpetrator, this may be registered as one or several crimes, depending on whether it is possible to distinguish each separate act. In Denmark and Norway, the statistics refer to cases. In general, one case will be opened for each victim, so the statistics do not indicate the actual number of rapes."

> Second, do you have any reason to think that the daily rape of wives by their husbands drives the high rape count in Sweden?

I have no reason to single out any particular factor. Rather, I am pointing out that your claim that Sweden is the top of Europe for rape is very difficult to support, and comparing raw numbers is effectively meaningless.

> I'm trying to imagine what you think is going on - the wife drops in to the police station to say "Hello, for the past thirty days my husband has been raping me"

That's an argument by incredulity.

I found the paper by von Hofer (the [13] above) to be quite interesting because it addresses a similar example.

Did you know that during one month in 1993 the number of rape reports in Sweden went from 150 to 270?

Quoting von Hofer: the high figure recorded in 1993 is in large part the result of a single report relating to a young male victim who had been sexually abused by his stepfather over a 10-year period. This very special case describes in a nutshell a number of the characteristics typical of Swedish crime statistics:

] it is the number of ‘alleged’ offences that is counted, not victims or cases; the victim was not a female, but rather a male;

] none of the offences had been committed during 1993, but rather over the course of several years prior to this: the increase in rape offences in 1993 and the subsequent reduction is thus in part illusory, being the result of this ‘over-reporting’ in 1993;

I also found it hard to imagine, but the point is, it happens. Don't use your incredulity as your simple reason to reject expert opinion.

> It's also an obvious rhetorical trick to compare present day rapes in Sweden to archaic laws that existed in the US until ~50 years ago

It's a rhetorical technique, yes. But it's not a disappearing trick. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape_in_the_United_Sta... and see examples like:

] For instance, a person in Oklahoma can not charge her/his spouse for rape if she/he is compelled to submit due to drugs "administered by or with the privity of the accused as a means of forcing the victim to submit", or when she/he is unconscious, as these situations are dealt under subsection (A) of Section 1111 which define rape as intercourse "with a male or female who is not the spouse of the perpetrator".

In Sweden, that counts as rape. In Oklahoma, it's not rape.

> Have you done that?

That's an obvious rhetorical trick too.

I don't think you've done it either. Nor even read the sources Wikipedia cites, which is certainly easier to do.

> what I mean is that Sweden's numbers, Sweden's rape stats, are higher

Sure. And what I mean is, you cannot meaningfully use those numbers to conclude "rape capital".

Again, for one month in 1993 the number of reported rapes in Sweden nearly doubled. For that month, did that Swedish province meaningfully become the rape capital of the country?

I certainly don't think so.

Even though that's using an "objective comparison (reported figures to reported figures)."

> Do Swedish women trust the police more than the women of other countries in Europe? Have you ever looked into that? Swedish police have extremely low clearance rates for rape - why would Swedish women have special trust in them?

Yes I did, back when this was the hot-topic pushed by right-wingers.

The Swedish numbers regarding trust, clearance rates, etc. were better for Sweden than the US. (I am a US citizen, so that's what I cared about.)

The Nordic countries trusted the police more than most of Europe. Quoting https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/5237/1/5237.pdf

] Figure 2 shows that opinions of the procedural fairness of the police vary more widely across Europe. ... Ukraine, Russian Federation and Israel have the least positive views on how the police treat people, while Denmark, Finland, Norway and Spain have the most positive views.

After Norway was Switzerland and then Sweden.

And women in Sweden appear to "trust the police in how they handle their duties" https://www.statista.com/statistics/661669/survey-on-trust-i...

The clearance numbers were strongly affected by national policies concerning "report" and "crime" and how things are tallied. As I recall, that was in the BRÅ report which you appear to reject outright.

But really, I did all this years ago and don't remember the details. I'm not going to be your personal research assistant while you Just Ask Questions.