MejlaJan Guillou+ FÖLJDet is a problem with the sentencing of Jean-Claude Arnault COLUMNISTS
I know not on the so-called kulturprofilen Jean-Claude Arnault is guilty of the two rapes, that a unanimous Svea court of appeal now ruled him. It does not know the court of appeal either. The only outsider who claims to know is akademiledamoten Horace Engdahl. He dismissed already the conviction tingsrättsdomen as unjust, built on insufficient evidence and a danger to the state of the empire.
Akademiledamoten Engdahls credibility, however, is undermined by the fact that he underlined his friend kulturprofilen as a real gentleman and a ”model for the Swedish young men”, and persistently, together with akademiledamoten Per Wästberg, recommended kulturprofilen Arnault to the order of the polar star for outstanding contribution to the promotion of the Swedish culture. It looks in the current situation, undeniably out as black humor.
1 of 5 | Photo: Jonas Ekströmer/TTKulturprofilen Jean-Claude Arnault arrive for the proceedings in the Svea court of appeal.
I think to kulturprofil Arnault is guilty, as he was now convicted. It think, of course, the court of appeal also, it is to say ”beyond any reasonable doubt”. The three judges and the two politicians who handed down the unanimous judgment have thought more on the secret the victim, the victim designated by the term ‘ Privacy A”, and the prosecutor’s witnesses than on the other party.
When I read the judgment, I find nothing to object to. The judgment is well-written and logical. The same conclusion seems a virtually unanimous legal expertise to have benefitted.
there is a Still a problem. It is just the three judges and the two politicians (lay assessors), lawyers and prosecutors who have been able to take some of the decisive oral evidence presented behind closed doors. The public and public representatives, the media, have been excluded. We would have drawn the same conclusions as the court of justice if we have been told, or at least got read, the transcripts of the oral evidence in the post? Probably. But we can not know.
In förundersökningsmaterialet shows the usual contradiction in våldtäktsmål, words against words. With one, possibly significant, difference. This time is both the victim of ”Confidentiality (A)” as her witnesses unusual otatuerade and also academically qualified. Rumor claims that ”Privacy (A” holds a professorship. And what significance has it had for the target’s output? Impossible to say.
It is a rättssäkerhetsbrist. One can very well understand furthermore, rape victims ‘ and witnesses need to appear without the audience inside the courtroom. But in retrospect, should not these crucial evidence to be secret. The media still has an obligation to show restraint and responsibility when informing the public. We have a well-tested ethical framework…
Which, however, collapsed during the metookampanj which culminated with a single conviction, the judgment of the Svea court of appeal. So see our dismal record out of legal certainty. At least a dozen men and a woman have been deprived of the honor and glory, and with jobs and the future, completely outside the legal system. It was lynchjustis, unworthy of a democratic society.
Anchorman Martin Timells any potential liability was tried to the court. But in this case, was witnesses of the prosecution, so to say, tattooed and lacked academic merit. They were not believed. Appears weighed, however, easily against the judgment in the media.
the Worst of the non duly convicted, suffered Aftonbladets Fredrik Virtanen. Against him, there was no sustainable evidence, therefore, innocent. But against him was directed to an intensive defamation, mainly in the konkurrenttidningen Expressen and of a still active lynchjustis, that he not only lost the honor and glory, but also his job at the newspaper Aftonbladet.
It was wrong.
Likely Virtanen to win a forthcoming libel suit against his worst bullies. As well as he won against Expressen, which became the multi-convicted in the Press council. Which still weighs lightly against the mobbens and lynchjustisens judgment.
the Question, the painful question, especially for us at Aftonbladet, then becomes inevitable. What can we do to repair the damage?
Short remark for the avoidance of doubt. The revolt, which was formulated during the hashtagen metoo was in many ways very eye-opening, beneficial, and necessary. Therein, I have agreed. But just today, there was reason to take up an entirely different angle.
For the rest, I believe…
… it is slightly piquant to the last permanent secretary Sara Danius in the Swedish Academy in the afterword to his book, ”as Bets10 housekeeper dead and other texts” as late as 2016, found reason to express special thanks and praise to kulturprofil Arnault.
… it is more than piquant to the multiple and blatant precipitate on the many years of the Press council affected the Swedish newspaper Expressen’s editor-in-chief Thomas Mattsson. Just for the he himself wrote about Virtanen. Bonnierpressen have found this circumstance not worth wasting ink on.
this is Jan Guillou 00:43
