Stop the presses are convicted of a case of defamation against Gunilla Persson, writes Expressen. She had sued the site and its responsible publisher Daniel Nyhlén for three cases of gross defamation. He is sentenced to pay 12,600 kronor in fines.
Mark Safaryan, Gunilla Persson's lawyer, is pleased with the conviction but not with the sentence.
This is a major victory for us, no one should commit crimes in the name of the Freedom of the Press Act, this is an important verdict in that perspective, he says to TT.
Gunilla Persson is also happy with the verdict.
I have spoken to her, but she was newly awakened. She is happy but disappointed that the penalty was not imprisonment, says Mark Safaryan.
To TT, Daniel Nyhlén says the verdict against him is incorrect – and also "judicially flawed":
We will appeal the decision to the Court of Appeal. But what I strongly react to and what I call judicially flawed in this mess is that both the trial and the verdict are illegal according to the Freedom of Expression Act.
Nyhlén refers to the fact that the article that formed the basis for the case was removed from the site before he was suspected of a crime.
Then, a responsible publisher has something called immunity. It was a legislative change made in 2019 – but everyone has missed it, he claims.
The trial was held two weeks ago in the Stockholm District Court.
The case concerns three articles published in 2020 and 2021, which Hollywoodfrun claims constitute gross defamation since they state that she was accused of animal cruelty, that she was stopped at the Swedish border, and that she was a bad parent.
The jury found that Stoppa pressarna defamed Gunilla Persson in one of the cases – an article where she was, among other things, suspected of benefit fraud.
After the jury's decision, the case proceeded to a judge, which is the usual procedure in freedom of the press cases.
