Catherine G. convicted of abusive entries about the murdered Maya of Mława and her family.
Catherine G convicted for entries – what the case concerns
The case of Katarzyna G. is the aftermath of the brutal killing of 16-year-old Maya from Mława, which has moved public opinion across Poland. Mother of the suspect Bartosz G. For months, she published thousands of comments online hitting a murdered teenager and her loved ones.
According to the findings of the family attorneys, Katarzyna G. may have published even about 10,000 offensive entries – from insinuation to vulgar accusations. These entries were a form of persistent harassment and defamation, which became the basis of a civil suit for the protection of personal property.
Judgment of the court – punishment for hate on the Internet
The District Court found that Catherine G. violated the personal property of the family of a 16-year-old murdered, committing libel and persistent harassment on the Internet. As a result, Catherine G convicted for entries must not only remove his comments, but also make amends to the family of victims financially and imagely.
The court ruled against Catherine G. a compensation of PLN 150 thousand to the father of Mai (Mai's family).
In the lawsuit, family attorneys demanded PLN 1 million, but the court considered this amount too high and reduced it to just PLN 150 thousand, with interest after finalising the judgment. In addition, Catherine G. must pay the costs of the court and publish an apology in the press and the Internet, which really increases the price of her hate.
Key elements of the judgment:
- ban on publishing any content compatible with Maya's memory and the good name of her family on the Internet, social media and traditional
- obligation to delete existing alerts containing false information
- a court settlement for a teenage father and a public apology in the media
The sentence is invalid, but the family attorney emphasizes that this is an important signal for all who "think that online can be offended without consequences".
Where the defense of your son ends, and the hate begins
Catherine G. explained before the court that she "defended the innocence of her son" and merely "showed facts". However, the judge found that the scale, content and tenacity of the entries went far beyond acceptable criticism or emotional comments of the parent.
In practice, the court considered several elements:
- repeatability and massity of published content
- vulgarity, harmful nature and lack of factual basis
- family situation – grieving after the death of the child
This is an important precedent signal: emotions related to a loud criminal case do not release responsibility for words, especially when they become a campaign for harassment of a particular family.
