Criminal proceedings brought against the host of “Kuuurija” for a suspected unlawful search were terminated.
A suspicion was filed against the show’s team members for carrying out an unlawful search in the so-called “child pornography” episode.
In our defence argument, we found that, from a legal perspective, the act did not even fulfil the necessary elements of an offence.
Firstly, the purpose of a search ought to be finding a certain object in the room that is relevant to the criminal proceedings with the subsequent aim of seizing said object. Katrin Lust merely moved 100 CDs from one place to another (specifically, onto the bed). Moving an item from one place to another does not constitute an act equivalent to a search because it is not followed by a seizure characteristic of a search.
It is also relevant to note that a provision provided in the Penal Code’s chapter titled “Offences against the administration of justice” means that only specific persons can commit the act. This is similar to how infanticide can only be committed by the newborn child’s mother and no one else. The same applies to searches – it requires that a person who has the necessary capacity for carrying out a search (i.e. a person acting in an official capacity) has committed the act but has done so without a legal basis.
Thirdly, the defendant’s guilt would have been precluded. Although an error regarding the unlawfulness of an act is rarely used in practice because, as a society, we agree on criminal law – it contains acts whose unlawfulness has been agreed upon in society, and everyone comprehends criminal offences. In the current case, however, at the time of committing the act, it did not seem as if the line between good and bad was being crossed. This was the view taken by experienced journalists, their attorneys and even the police officers who were present at the location.
The North District Prosecutor’s Office terminated the proceedings, finding that Katrin Lust cannot be accused of an unlawful search carried out in the home of U.K., where Katrin Lust opened cupboards and drawers with the aim of discovering evidence, which could indicate that the man portrayed on Lust’s show
was a paedophile, for the police officers present at the location. Given that the activities of Katrin Lust were monitored by police officers who were present at the location and made no effort to stop her, Katrin Lust cannot be accused of having committed a crime – in a situation where the police officers did not stop K. Lust, K. Lust was not expected to understand that her actions were prohibited.