Details of how the prosecutor reasoned come on Friday when the lawsuit application becomes public. One who is surprised by the prosecutor's decision is the freedom of the press expert Nils Funcke:

- I am a little surprised, it is a high threshold for the general to go in and party for a party that now happens when public prosecution is brought. Such things are usually resolved by the parties themselves, except in particularly aggravating cases when minors are involved.

general Interest

Angel Eklund, lawyer and chairman of the nonprofit Institute Institute for Law and the Internet, believes that the prosecution was expected.

- These are very serious accusations that were widely disseminated. There is a desire by the public to get the boundaries tested on what to say about a person and yet get free. Another woman has recently been convicted of similar charges in a Facebook group.

Nils Funcke thinks that reasoning sends the signal that society has surrendered to the public:

- Just because the public is interested in one thing does not mean that one should ignore the facts. A person like Fredrik Virtanen can bring his own case and may find himself questioned.

The truth can also be slanderous

Angel Eklund believes that a common misconception is that you are not guilty of slander as long as the information you disseminate is true. But it doesn't have to be, even if public figures can tolerate more than non-public ones.

- It would not have been any difference if he had been convicted of rape, the crime of slander is about portraying someone as culpable. In some cases it is considered defensible, in others not.

The criminal offense has at most two years in the scale of punishment.