Veronika and Sebastian Bohrn Mena have sued Schilling for a public retraction of several statements that they describe as “falsely factual”, “defamatory” and “damaging to his reputation”. The value in dispute is 12,000 euros.
- Read more: Proceedings against Schilling discontinued
The court hearing is a first hearing, which serves to discuss the further trial program and get it on track. According to her lawyer Maria Windhager, Schilling will not appear, and it was unclear whether the plaintiffs would appear at the district court. A request to this effect from their legal representative Peter Zöchbauer was still pending as of early Thursday afternoon.
Lawsuit includes three points
The plaintiffs accuse Schilling of having “spread” false claims “to a large number of third parties” since 2022 and thereby “endangering” the plaintiffs’ “economic reputation”, which Lena Schilling denies. The lawsuit specifically covers three points: Sebastian Bohrn Mena has been violent towards his wife several times and in various ways, as a result of which Veronika Bohrn Mena suffered a miscarriage. Schilling is also said to have retracted the claim that the Bohrn Mena couple are personally enriching themselves through a non-profit foundation they founded and run and are acting “like the mafia”.
- Read more from OÖN columnist Meinhard Lukas: “The character dossier Lena Schilling”
Lena Schilling stressed that she had “never made public” the incriminating allegations. As far as the alleged assaults are concerned, she “learned of concerns about them in private and only discussed such suspicions confidentially while maintaining the necessary neutrality and balance,” Schilling’s legal representative stated in a written statement.
Schilling’s statement on the foundation “sufficiently covered”
Regarding the conduct of Bohrn Menas in connection with their foundation, Schilling’s lawyer Windhager states that due to the plaintiffs’ “questionable business practices”, the statement that they were “personally enriching themselves through their work for their non-profit foundation is supported by sufficient factual evidence”. Personally enriching oneself through work in a non-profit organization – in the sense of paid services for this organization – is “neither illegal nor morally frowned upon. Consequently, the lawsuit proves to be unfounded in this regard either”.
- Read more: “Farting” – Greens angry about “mudslinging” campaign against Schilling
Windhager concludes by saying that Lena Schilling is “not to blame for the debate that is now being held publicly about the facts in question”. Rather, the plaintiffs themselves “enabled and fuelled the public dissemination of the incriminating allegations”.
Bohrn Menas’ legal representative, Peter Zöchbauer, counters that Schilling “has ‘put out into the world’ the untrue, unsubstantiated accusations she herself invented and should have expected that “all further reactions or their further dissemination would be attributed to this”. In this respect, “specifically dangerous action” has been taken for the damage that has occurred since the respective statements were made. The accusations are “completely untrue” and their dissemination “culpable”.
My themes
For your bookmarked topics
new articles found.
info By clicking on the icon you add the keyword to your topics.
info
By clicking on the icon you open your “my topics” page. You have of 15 keywords saved and would have to remove keywords.
info By clicking on the icon you remove the keyword from your topics.
Add the topic to your topics.
Source: Nachrichten
