[ad_1]
Gintarė Vosyliūtė, representative of the Vilnius City District Court, informed the alfa.lt portal that on September 13, the representative of Andrius Tapinas, host of the program and founder of Laisvės TV, received an appeal.
The complaint was reportedly filed shortly after the deadline for filing a complaint, on 13 August. A 30-day period was established to appeal against the published decision.
10,000 of P. Gražulis were expected. euros
The situation, which caused the clash of two famous men, leads to the beginning of December 2020, when the figure of a naked man appeared during the meeting of the Culture Committee of P. Gražulis, prompting many questions.
While fans and critics of P. Gražulis guessed who this shirtless man was, politicians tried to convince journalists that he was Andrius Tapinas.
A. Tapinas himself did not accept this news so positively, as he brought P. Gražulis to court for insulting honor and dignity. Afterwards, the presenter also shared the latest insights on how the test is going. At the time, the presenter said that the meeting had gone well, shared hopes while waiting for the results.
Arno Strumilos / 15min nuotr./Andrius Tapinas,
The conclusions of the case were presented on Friday, August 13. As it turned out, Andrius Tapinas, the host of the program, who brought Petras Gražulis to court, was not wearing anything at the time and would ask for 10 thousand. He was offered to pay for himself with a public apology.
According to alfa.lt, the judge examining the case, Igor Kasimov, made the decision to dismiss A. Tapin’s claim as unfounded. According to this decision, the presenter of the television programs should cover the legal expenses of the Seimas member, estimated at 2,420 euros.
Such a decision was unexpected for the host. On his Facebook, Tapin wrote at the time that he promised to complain:
“Today, the Vilnius District Court rejected my claim against Petras Gražulis, in which I asked to refute her false statements about the situation of the famous naked man behind Peter’s back. Peter is so ecstatic that he has already made four posts about it on Facebook and there will probably be more.
I was surprised by the ruling and the court’s arguments. Anyway, already at the preparatory hearing, it seemed strange to me that Judge Igor Kasimov had turned Gražulis upside down. He answered all the judge’s questions not on the subject, in tirades about Gargždis, homosexuals, the persecutor of Tapina, the judge only repeated the questions until Gražulis finally beat him, he declared that there is almost a KGBist court here that does not allow him talk, disconnect and did not even show up at the main meeting. My lawyer said that he saw for the first time that the judge would allow himself to be so protected.
90% of the judgment consisted of the repetition of our speeches and theoretical considerations, and the reasoning itself was divided into a few paragraphs.
Judge Kasimov declared that Gražulis was wrong, which Gražulis himself confirmed, but it was obvious that my immediate surroundings (relatives, friends, friends, colleagues, real and rational business partners or others) had to understand that this was not true, for what not I did not suffer any damage or inconvenience and the action was dismissed.
To our argument that such a lie was deliberately spread by a member of the Seimas during a session of the Seimas to receive maximum diffusion and that there is not only my immediate environment, but also many other people for whom the words of a member of the Seimas will appear as a sacred truth in a sentence: if it is a proper self-expression for a member of the Seimas, it is not the subject of this case.
The last argument of the court was that since both parties had a negative opinion of each other, not everyone had reason to believe that I was there.
Well, both my opinion and the lawyer’s are very poor arguments. It seems that the judge who experimented with Gražulis, who is a member of Seimas during the first session, simply decided to play football in a simple way.
We will meet 100 percent in district court. If we lose, we will have a precedent that will allow members of the Seimas to speak outright nonsense about anything. We’ll see. “
P. Gražulis assured that he was joking
15 minutes Before announcing the results, he also contacted the deputy of the Seimas P. Gražulis, who reacted to the actions of A. Tapinas without hiding his emotions.
“It’s stupid! Tapin seems like a brave man who tries to humiliate, despise, make fun of everyone. As there was a person behind me for a second during the meeting, he noticed his media was spreading and he was trying to make me gay. He failed at that. I said A. Tapin distributed.
Luke April / 15min photo / Peter Gražulis
He goes to Gargždai, so I said that A.Tapinas was there. He said it humiliated him a lot. It used to be fashionable to be a communist and now a homosexual, so Tapin should be happy, not sad about it. He said he cried when he saw that he had been dunked there. Keep crying! “- the politician wove a not very clear idea.
P. Gražulis is firmly convinced that A. Tapinas wanted to humiliate him with his actions, which supposedly caused such an echo that he is now in court.
“He wanted to despise me, to make me gay. Since his aim was to humiliate me in general, I said that there is A. Tapin behind his back. If you said it was very fashionable to be gay, why were you offended ?! Being a communist used to be in style. The father was a communist, perhaps he did not achieve this, “P. Gražulis told A. Tapinas again.
The Seimas member described the situation as absurd and added that he expected justice from the judicial system in this case.
“As he is a public person, much more can be said about him than about a private person. And I said that Tapin is after him. Where is the insult here? I saw that post maybe 10 times and maybe the next day I saw what was happening in it. Tapin noticed and circled, watching every second of me. Tapin should definitely lose this case. And if not, I will present it to the European Court of Human Rights, “said P. Gražulis, who does not intend to publish the story easily.
[ad_2]
