Influences convicted of sharing abusive material



[ad_1]

In 2017, the Danish police completed the investigation into the sharing of an assault video that was allowed to circulate freely on Facebook for a long time and was shared thousands of times.

More than 1,000 young Danish people have been charged in what is known as the “Umbrella case”. As of January 1 of this year, 334 people had been convicted and during the year several had to appear in court and receive their verdict. Among them are the influencers Mia Sofie Nørgaard (19).

One night in 2017, Nørgaard received a Messenger message from a friend. The friend asked if she had the much talked about video, which shows a 15-year-old Danish girl, along with several children of the same age.

Video of 15 years in abuse: - You can never have a normal life again, it is recognized everywhere

Video of 15 years in abuse: – You can never have a normal life again, it is recognized everywhere

Nørgaard is said to have sent the video to his friend, without giving much thought to the action. According to BT, which refers to the statements given to the podcast documentary “Shared online”, it reacts strongly to the verdict.

– I think it is violent that a mistake I made as a child affects my adult life, she says.

You think the verdict is unfair

According to Danish criminal law, sharing sexual videos or images of persons under the age of 18 can be punished with fines or imprisonment of up to one year, if the content is shared without consent.

Nørgaard was sentenced to seven days’ probation, three years with a blemish on the so-called criminal record, and ten years with a blemish on the child’s certificate.

The 19-year-old is currently living off social media, but the plan was to become an elementary school teacher. As it is now, the ruling means that you are not allowed to work with children under the age of 15 until you turn 30.

– It is disgusting to think of “child pornography”, but when you are 16 years old, this is not “child pornography” for you. When you are the same age as the people in the video, you can reflect on it. You’re the same age, he says on the podcast.

The influencer claims that she did not know that sharing was illegal.

– The fact that they put you in the same booth as pedophiles when you are 16 years old, I think is very violent.

This summer, various political parties described it as unreasonable for the convicts in the “Umbrella case” to have the verdict hung on the record.

If there is a majority in the Folketing to eliminate this, the majority will be left with seven-day conditional prison sentences for the division, with no points on the record.

The video

The video is supposed to “scare” people from abusing children

Hard on the police

The girl in the video, Sofie, appeared on Politiken in 2018, where she recounted how the video has affected her life. In the case, he came with strong criticism of the police, who believe they did an “insufficient job” to arrest the division after reporting the case in 2015.

– They have not taken over the propagation, but have left me the responsibility until the end, he said.

Sofie told the newspaper that she had to change schools several times, as she was constantly recognized in the video, where her full name is mentioned.

1004 youths accused of sharing video of abuse.  Now the first five show up in court

1004 youths accused of sharing video of abuse. Now the first five show up in court

North Zealand police later acknowledged that, in hindsight, they could have done more. The leader of the investigation, Lau Thygesen, noted that better cooperation with Facebook was crucial so that they could finally stop the spread.

Assistance attorney Miriam Michaelsen tells Ekstra Bladet that those who are convicted will now receive a lighter punishment than those who were convicted in the same case complex in August this year.

It refers to a Supreme Court ruling against one of the defendants in the case, in which it was decided that no compensation should be paid to the aggrieved, as has happened in the past.

– It means something to my clients who see that this has consequences. For them, it does not seem reasonable that those who come later in the queue should have to pay less in compensation or receive a lighter punishment, because for them the consequence has been the same.

[ad_2]