A woman writes her ex-husband’s new partner a lousy Google review for her business on the Internet. The victim is powerless. The judiciary does not help her.
The accused is acquitted by the Bülach judge.
The 47-year-old owner of a practice for alternative medicine asserted in court that the author of a Google review had never been to her practice. The one star review reads as follows, we cite the spelling mistakes on purpose: «Bad mood… snooty…. didn’t do any good… won lottery training…. unqualified and empathetic.. .very penetrating voice!!» The woman explained to the court reporters who were present that she had asked Google to delete the rating several times. So far, however, Google has refused.
The owner of the practice is the new partner of the ex-husband of the author of the text. It seems obvious that the review is not about the proper evaluation of a job. The practice owner reported the copywriter, also because of other incidents. Her partner’s ex-wife was then held in custody for a day. The Zurich cantonal police’s anti-violence service was also called in.
However, the prosecutor dropped a criminal investigation into threats and coercion. On the other hand, she judged the Google review, the suspect’s private Whatsapp messages to the practice owner, in which she was described, among other things, as “old”, “cheap”, “chubby” and “flabby”, and telephone calls as criminally relevant.
The 43-year-old Swiss woman was sentenced to a conditional fine of 40 daily rates of CHF 90 with an extended probationary period of 3 years and a fine of CHF 300 for defamation, abuse and abuse of a telecommunications system. The convict contested the penalty order, hired a lawyer and demanded an acquittal.
Staying away as a “de-escalating measure”
However, she does not appear at the court hearing. Your lawyer justifies this as a “de-escalating measure”. He wanted to prevent “the two women from meeting in court”. The owner of the practice is present, but has no legal representation. The public prosecutor does not have to appear in single-judge proceedings.
The single judge still proposes settlement negotiations. But these are rejected. During the party speeches, the private prosecutor, who has no legal training, is a little overwhelmed when she is asked to comment on the statements of the defense attorney. She demands the deletion of the still existing Google entry, a satisfaction of 5000 francs and 380 francs for legal advice. The behavior of the accused was absolutely frightening and damaging to their business.
The defense attorney mainly argues that the Google review refers to the private prosecutor as a business person. However, the Federal Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that the criminal law application of the concept of honor to a person’s professional reputation is excluded.
Full acquittal
The Bülach single judge actually acquitted the accused. She will receive 250 francs in compensation for unjust imprisonment and 2,000 francs in court damages. The demands of the practice owner are referred to the civil court. The single judge followed the defender’s reasoning in terms of content: The concept of honor in criminal law only protects the ethical integrity of a person. Their social reputation or professional standing is not protected. The Supreme Court has held that on several occasions.
In addition, the number and quality of the telephone calls are not sufficient for misuse of a telecommunications system. The private prosecutor remains completely at a loss and asks the judge what that means: “Did the prosecutor make a mistake?” A lot more had happened that was not in the indictment. The single judge believes that he can only decide on the content of the indictment. And as a matter of principle, a public prosecutor must always prosecute in cases of doubt.
Judgment GB220001 of May 12, 2022, not yet final.