Published: Just now
The reduced sentence in the Court of Appeal against Jeanette’s partner who severely abused her has aroused anger and given rise to demonstrations.
Now the prosecutor in the case has forwarded the verdict to the Development Center in Gothenburg.
– This is important for mother’s recovery and for all women who live in a violent relationship, says Jeanette’s daughter Nathalie.
During the day, chamber prosecutor Birgitta Fernlund, the prosecutor who prosecuted Jeanette’s partner for murder, sent the verdict to the Development Center in Gothenburg.
– I am not authorized to complain, it is only the attorney general who can complain and the Development Center in Gothenburg is now looking at the judgment before taking a position on this, writes Birgitta Fernlund in a message to Hudiksvall’s newspaper.
She tells the newspaper that she considers the chances of the Attorney General choosing to appeal the verdict to the Supreme Court as small, as the Attorney General only appeals a few cases per year, cases which in the long run may become prejudicial.
“Had she lived without his violence?”
But for Jeanette’s family, today’s news has brought a glimmer of hope.
– We are torn between hope and despair, but it is so important for everyone that this verdict comes out as it should. At least he needs to be held accountable for what he put mom through. I have no doubt that he understood that she could die from his violence, says Nathalie to Aftonbladet.
– This is important for the mother’s recovery and for all women who live in a violent relationship. I hope the Attorney General asks the question: would she, without a reasonable doubt, be alive today if it weren’t for his violence?
When 61-year-old Jeanette was found dead on her bathroom floor in a villa outside Hudiksvall this summer, she had old and new injuries over almost her entire body.
In addition to a broken nose bone, ten broken ribs and damage to the spleen, she also had head injuries so serious that they probably led to her death. The investigation was also able to show how the partner exposed Jeanette to violence earlier during their relationship and Jeanette had started telling friends and relatives what she was involved in.
But she was afraid of breaking up with her partner.
“If I leave him, he will kill me,” she told a friend.
“Could not be convicted of murder”
But when the district court found her partner guilty of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment, the Court of Appeal made a different assessment.
Even if, just like the district court, they determined that it was the partner who caused Jeanette’s injuries, there was still reason for doubt in the coroner’s report, that it cannot be completely ruled out that Jeanette died as a result of drug poisoning.
– The prosecutor claimed that the woman died as a result of injuries to the cerebrum that had been caused by the accused man. However, we judged that the investigation left room for the death to have instead been caused by drug poisoning and that there was therefore a reasonable doubt that the cause of death was what the prosecutor claimed. For that reason alone, the man could not be sentenced for murder or grossly causing the death of another, says one of the Court of Appeal councilors to Aftonbladet.
The Snippa verdict was appealed
After the verdict, a demonstration has been organized in Hudiksvall by the local women’s shelter and Unizon.
The organizers explained the purpose:
– It was partly to honor the memory of Jeanette, but also to stand up for all women who are failed by the justice system.
The last time the public prosecutor appealed a judgment to the Supreme Court was in connection with the aforementioned snippa judgment.
Prosecutor General Petra Lundh then said that the man who was acquitted of the rape of a child in the Court of Appeal should be sentenced for the rape of a child in two cases to three years in prison.
– I request that the Supreme Court remove the judgment of the Court of Appeal and return the case to the Court of Appeal for further proceedings because, in my opinion, the Court of Appeal committed several errors in the proceedings, Lundh said then.
Facts
Supreme Court
The National Prosecutor is the country’s highest prosecutor and the only public prosecutor in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is the last instance among the general courts and a purely precedent instance. By bringing appropriate cases to the Supreme Court, the Attorney General contributes to obtaining information on questions about the practical application of the law.
Every year, the Attorney General appeals a number of Court of Appeal judgments to the Supreme Court (9 cases in 2022).
Even the convicted person has the opportunity to appeal his sentence. In both cases, leave to appeal must be requested and in cases where the convicted person appeals, the public prosecutor must often express his opinion in a so-called response letter.
In 2022, 63 response letters were submitted (73 response letters in 2021). Also through the response letters, the Attorney General contributes to the clarification of various legal issues.
Read more