After reading your comments I wanted to post a few more observations,
In Islam we do everything to protect a woman against life's harms, however, all until a girl is raped or abused does the law regarding what is Islamic or not become less clear. So why is that.
If a girl and her aunt go to a Islamic cleric of the courts and ask for a solution then that solution should be to favor the raped victim not the rapist. The girl was told that she would be lashed, because she according to Islamic law is considered a mistress. So, why does this not outrage anyone more than the entire sad story? Does this man need to be removed from his position?
If he is right about judgment then where is he getting this statement from and how is he justifying it?
The stepfather worked for the royal family so already all of you understand that he will be considered an untouchable, but again why would an Islamic country allow this to be?
This is not an issue about the west, because an American country took her in and gave her protection. In America a girl does not have to run away from her own country to escape lashes, no girl under any circumstance of rape or abuse will receive lashes under western law, so this is not about the west.
We cannot deny what she was told by the courts of her country, or her family so we cannot call this rubbish or a mistake or compare this to another country based on a single case. But I did some research and it seems that lashing is a common practice justified by sharia in regards to rape.
This is another case I found from UAE about this ruling. http://secretdubai.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html
I'm deeply concerned especially that with what we know about child abusers, why aren't these countries not offering both the rapist, and the rape victim treatment.
What message are we giving to our daughters here, if your father rapes you then you will have to run away to be get help because your country and your people will lash you if they decide to help you?