23-04-2016

Deres Majestæt!

Your Holiness Pope Francis!

Kære Mosaisk Troessamfund

Kære Islamisk Trossamfund

Kære Statsminister Lars Løkke Rasmussen

Kære Kirkeminister Bertel Haarder

Kære Justitsminister Søren Pind

Kære Kristeligt Dagblad

Kære Pressenævnet

Kære Marlene Borst Hansen

Kolding , 23 April 2016

Kære Justitsminister Søren Pind.

Vi sender også dette særskilt til dig og fremlægger sagen for dig, for nu kan vi bare ikke holde til mere .

Vi beder dig hjælpe os og gribe ind og bringe retslig orden ind og en ende på denne sag.

Vi er udsat for embedsmisbrug fra politiet og politiløgne, så vi har mistet vores retssikkerhed i Danmark, hvilket startede med en betjent som nægter at give sin identitet til kende. Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen kender hans identitet og ligeså må betjenten have udført sin lovpligtige notatpligt tilbage i september 2012.

Du har på et tidspunkt i 2015 udtalt, at nu vil du til bunds i de sager om politiløgne. Det holder vi dig fast på. Vi kan ikke klare, at tingene går fra værre til værre.

Pressenævnet og landsdækkende Kristeligt Dagblad hænger os ud i Danmark. De tillægger os, at vi mener, vi udøver chikane mod sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen i Hjerm. Det er overhovedet ikke vores opfattelse. Vi har bedt ham tage ansvar for sin administrative del, en udmeldelseskvittering, der beviser hvad han gjorde med vore dokumenter. De papirer har vore personlige Cpr numre på og Jonas havde sendt dem ud til os så vi ku udfylde vores del af at udmelde os af Kolding VALGMENIGHED kirken. Derpå returnerede vi dem til ham for hans underskrift.

DERFRA gemte han sig så bag polititilhold så vi ikke kunne få svar fra ham, om hvad han gjorde med disse vore dokumenter.

Det skulle være muligt at melde sig ud af en kirke uden at få et polititilhold. I stedet indmeldte han os i statens kirke i to år uden vores viden og samtykke. Vi betalte kirkeskat i to år til en kristendomsform og dåbsteologi, vi er inderligt imod, og som vi ikke ønsker at være en del af. – Apropos højest samfundsrelevant kampagne fra Ateistisk Selskab:

”Hvorfor skal tro koste noget?"

Med venlig hilsen

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt.

I Dagbladet Information for i går http://www.information.dk/547395 er FORSIDEN viet til temaet at politiet lyver. Det er ikke godt for os borgere og det er magtovergreb, at deres biskop er ligeglad med at han og Jonas benytter sig af politiløgn, så Jonas ikke skal tale med os om sin forfatningsstridige indmeldelse af os i statsreligionen og statskirken som vi udtrykkeligt ikke ønskede at være meldt ind i!

Og vi oplever det meget respektløst mod os og mod borgerne i HJERM at de ikke tager hånd om at få fjernet polititilhold og tager alvorligt, at politiet lyver og nægter os borgere PARTSHØRING på trods af henstilling fra Statsadvokat i VIBORG, Senioranklager Merete Sanning‼

Det falder tilbage på byens kommune, når dens biskop er direkte involveret og holder hånden over politi løgne fra den præst, som det er hans ansvar at føre tilsyn med.

Hvis de frasiger sig at de er en del af politik og samfund, så bliver vi andre bare legetøj for dem. Måske er det derfor de ikke mener de behøver at tage ansvar for de konsekvenser deres liv har i deres medborgeres liv. Det er en total misforståelse. Biskoppen lyver for sig selv om sin og kirkens rolle i politik. Ingen kan holde sig uden for politik. Det er ansvarsfralæggelse, at de tror de kan melde sig ud af samfundet og sige vi har ikke noget med politik at gøre. Indgår vi ikke alle i det politiske liv i vores samfund, blot i egenskab af at være borgere i vort land? Når sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen og biskop Henrik Stubkjær er involveret sammen med politiet i at nægte os partshøring, og i at vi har MISTET vores retssikkerhed som borgere i Danmark, så står biskoppen og sognepræsten ikke som nogen der blander sig uden om politik, men de står som KIRKENS repræsentanter for LOVLØSHED OG ANARKI!!!

Med venlig hilsen Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Vi vil gerne vide, om medlem af Pressenævnet Marlene Borst Hansen er politikeren fra Det Radikale Venstre, født i Kolding? Pressenævnet berettiger Kristeligt Dagblad i at tale agtelseforringende om os: "

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende..."

Jonas Serner-Pedersen er tjenestemand ansat i statens kirke. Vi er ikke SINDSFORVIRREDE OG VI ER IKKE STALKERE, SOM CHIKANERER EN PRÆST, OG VI HANDLER IKKE PÅ EN SINDSFORVIRRET MÅDE ELLER ER ENIGE I AT VÆRE MENNESKER, SOM CHIKANERER JONAS SERNER-PEDERSEN sådan som der står i kendelsen fra Pressenævnet. Vi forventer af en præst, at han tager sit ANSVAR op i henhold til hans officielle status som embedsmand i staten.

Det er for os meget alvorligt og voldsomt at Pressenævnets kendelse med en politiker på, er en dom som påvirker ud i samfundet. Domstolene er den dømmende magt i Danmark, men Pressenævnet tillader at vi to borgere bliver hængt ud, dømt og udsat for magtmisbrug. "Folketinget er den udøvende magt, og det er magt fra en politikers side at et medlem af folketinget skriver under på en kendelse, som der er en så mangelfuld research bag: "

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare."

Pressenævnet undlader FULDSTÆNDIG at fremføre og kommentere, at Chefredaktør Erik Bjerager, Kristeligt Dagblad kalder os sindsforstyrrede!!!

Vi har mistet vores retssikkerhed i Danmark, og Jonas Serner- Pedersen kan bruge statens politi mod os. Legalitetsprincippet er fuldstændig sat ud af kraft, for vi er dømt uden forhør. Kristeligt Dagblad og Pressenævnet tager enkelte dele ud af domsskriftet, så det bliver en anden historie end noget vi er en del af. De bruger os som anonyme parter i et eventyr eller en sladderhistorie. Vi er ikke del af den version med sådan en mangel på fakta og mangel på SANDHED OM HVAD DER TILLADES AT FINDE STED I DANMARK FRA PRÆST OG BISKOP I STATSKIRKEN OG STATENS POLITI OG STATSANKLAGEREN I VIBORG LIGE SÅ VEL SOM RETSSYSTEMET.

Pressenævnets kendelse dømmer i sagen, da de tillader sig at skrive ”I mailen udbreder de selv budskabet at de står bag chikanen af sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen”. Her er det Pressenævnet, der med en politiker fra Det Radikale Venstre dømmer i VORES sag, for vi har ikke sagt, at det er chikane vi står bag.

Han behøvede kun, som vi har sagt mange mange gange, at mødes med os i 15-20 minutter og afslutte sine administrative pligter før han forlod sin tidligere præsteansættelse i Kolding. Det var et nemt og ikke særlig farligt stykke arbejde for ham at udføre. Vi er ikke farlige, så hvorfor misbruge STATSMIDLER og inddrage politiet lige så vel som RETTEN, og lige så vel som utallige kostbare skrivelser fra mere end en STATSADVOKAT i Viborg?

Det er for os meget alvorligt, at det er politikeren Marlene Borst Hansen, der lægger navn til og stempler os i en sag, hvor der ikke er lavet en grundig research fra Pressenævnets og Kristeligt Dagblads side i henhold til A.1 og A.3 i Presseansvarsloven.

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare."

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply.

Både Pressenævnet og Erik Bjerager / Kristeligt Dagblad kan sagtens se det, uden at I skal kalde os sindsforvirrede eller få os til at fremstå i et dårligt lys / rigtig negativt, når I åbner for alle de links til hjemmesiden ”Freedom of Speech > Ytringsfriheden”, vi sender. Det er jeres ansvar, at I fremstiller os i et negativt lys ved måden Erik Bjerager, Jonas Serner-Pedersen og hans overordnede biskop Henrik Stubkjær i Viborg klandrer os for at vi skriver ud til alle mulige.

Hverken biskopper, provster eller præster, det inkluderer Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen, ejer Kirken.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

I domsudskriften fra retssagen i Holstebro i 2013 står der, at Jonas Serner-Pedersen blev bortvist fra Kolding Valgmenighed. Det er rettens udtryk for at han blev fyret af Kolding Valgmenigheds lederskab. Vi er ikke så frække, at vi lyver i retten. Der står også, at han ikke ville være med til at afsløre ulovligheder. Vi er whistleblowere, og vi har fremlagt de ulovligheder der foregår, ud i en stor kreds af mailmodtagere.

Jonas Serner-Pedersen er tjenestemand i statens kirke. Han gik til politiet 19. september 2012, og fik en betjent til at ringe Daniela Skov op, som sagde ”Jeg har Sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen fra HJERM stående her på stationen. Han siger du hører ikke til i hans menighed”. " er du forelsket i ham?" Spørger han på grov måde og han optræder på brutal og grov måde og giver mig ikke mulighed for at svare selvom han spørger, hvad jeg er i gang med, når jeg kontakter Jonas. Vi havde mailet og tilbudt Jonas den dag, at vi ville komme op til HJERM og så ku han færdiggøre det administrative papirarbejde til os enkelt uden at han behøvede at køre til Kolding. I stedet farer han op til Politiet - helt ude af for os logiske proportioner.

Marlene Borst Hansen stempler os ved at hun vitterligt er tidligere FT medlem. Vi er bare to almindelige borgere op imod hun som er politiker. SÅ hendes navn er ekstra stærkt, SIGNALVÆRDIEN er voldsom mod os, når det er en stempling fra politisk side, imod os to danske borgere.

Det sidste vi oplevede i sagen fra juridisk hold var, at senioranklager, statsadvokat i Viborg Merete Sanning gav os medhold i at politiet skulle give os partshøring i sagen. Det skrev hun så til politiet – de har aldrig villet tage os i forhør. Igen fik vi blot det svar fra Midt- og Vestjyllands Politi, at den sag anså de for lukket. Det har bragt os i sådan en afmagt og været udelukkende magtmisbrug mod os almindelige borgere.

Jonas Serner-Pedersen har ikke taget hånd om dokumenter, der var vigtige for os. Vores CPR-numre var på de dokumenter. Vore henvendelser til Jonas Serner-Pedersen var for at tale om disse papirer. Hvad var der blevet af vore dokumenter???

Derfor skal hverken Pressenævnet eller Kristeligt Dagblad påstå, at vi er enige i at vi deltager i chikane mod Jonas Serner-Pedersen, det er en dom de fælder over os. Vi skrev som et svar til Erik Bjerager om hans påstand om, at vi er sindsforvirrede, at vi ville være mere sindsforvirrede, hvis vi benægtede at der var et polititilhold på os. Vi efterlyser en grundig research fra Kristeligt Dagblads side – jf. det af Pressenævnet omtalte A.1 og A.3.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

Kendelse

fra

Pressenævnet

I sag nr. 16-70-00934

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt

mod

Kristeligt Dagblad

afsagde Pressenævnet tirsdag den 12. april 2016 sålydende

Kendelse

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har klaget over artiklen

Chikanerede præster mangler hjælp” bragt den 15. december 2015 på

kristeligt-dagblad.dk og den 16. december 2015 i printversionen Kriste-

ligt Dagblad, idet de mener, at god presseskik er tilsidesat.

1 Sagsfremstilling

Kristeligt Dagblad bragte henholdsvis den 15. og 16. december

2015 artiklen ”Chikanerede præster mangler hjælp” på sin hjemmeside

og i avisen. Af underrubrikken fremgår følgende:

Trusler og forfølgelse af præster er et stigende problem, påpeger

Præsteforeningen efter chikanesag. Der mangler central indsats

for at håndtere problemet.”

Af teksten fremgår følgende:

100 ubehagelige opkald om dagen. 12 timers chikane på tele-

fonsvareren. Sognepræsten i Hjerm Sogn i Vestjylland, Jonas

Serner-Pedersen, er på tredje år blevet chikaneret af to personer

fra sin tidligere valgmenighed i Kolding. De to har fået et politi-

tilhold, men retter nu i stedet de ondskabsfulde beskeder mod

præstens sognebørn i Hjerm.

De taler om, hvor dårligt et menneske jeg er, og at de føres bag

lyset, fordi jeg er en skummel person. Det er meget trættende, og

så synes jeg, at det er rigtig ubehageligt, at det skal gå ud over

de mennesker, der bor her i sognet,” siger Jonas Serner-

Pedersen.

[Artiklen fortsætter med anden omtale end om klagerne og præ-

sten i Vestjylland, inden artiklen fortsætter:]

Det har ikke været muligt at få en kommentar fra Kirkeministe-

riet, men Henrik Stubkjær, der er biskop for Jonas Serner-

Pedersen i Viborg Stift, savner ikke en handlingsplan for udsatte

præster:

Der er taget skridt til at hjælpe den pågældende præst, og mit

indtryk er, at sagerne vil være så individuelle, at de kan være

svære at fange i en enkelt handlingsplan. Men har sagen et om-

fang som den omtalte sag, vil det være naturligt, at biskoppen

indkalder til et samlet møde med de relevante myndigheder,”

siger biskoppen.”

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt klagede den 23. februar

2016 til Kristeligt Dagblad, der 24. februar afviste klagen. Klagen er

modtaget i Pressenævnet 25. februar 2016.

Yderligere Oplysninger

Af Retten i Holstebros dom af 20. juni 2013 i sagen, anklage-

myndigheden mod Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt, fremgår det, at

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt erkendte og blev dømt for at have

overtrådt politiets advarsel om ikke at henvende sig til Jonas Serner-

Pedersen (overtrådt et tilhold). De blev begge idømt bødestraf og pålagt

at betale sagens omkostninger.

Daniela Skov blev dømt for at have sendt, indtalt og mailet et

ukendt antal beskeder til præsten i december 2012, for at have indtalt

en besked og sendt 57 sms’er i januar 2013, ligesom hun blev dømt for

at have sendt 133 sms’er fra 19.-23. februar 2013.

Lars Skov Krøgholt blev dømt for at have sendt en sms og tre e-

mails i januar 2013 og for at have sendt to sms’er og foretaget fire tele-

fonopkald til Jonas Serner-Pedersen i februar 2013.

Af dommen fremgår det, at klagerne forklarede, at de havde ret-

tet henvendelse til Jonas Serner-Pedersen, fordi han skulle sende dem

nogle papirer, men han havde forholdt sig passiv.

2 Parternes synspunkter

2. 1 Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholts synspunkter

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har anført, at de i artiklen

beskrives som ” to personer fra sin tidligere valgmenighed i Kolding”, og

at de angiveligt skulle have foretaget ” 100 ubehagelige opkald om da-

gen” og indtalt ”12 timers chikane på telefonsvareren” gennem de sidste

tre år.

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har erkendt at have haft

henvendt sig til præsten ved telefonopkald, sms’er og e-mails, men de

har afvist at have henvendt sig i det omfang, der beskrives i artiklen. De

henvendte sig for at få noget papirarbejde udført, og Kristeligt Dagblad

tager fejl, når avisen beskriver forholdene som fakta. Ordene ”ubehage-

lige”, ”chikane”, ”ondsindede”, ”føres bag lyset”, ”skummel person” be-

skriver ikke deres hensigt med henvendelserne og er subjektive udsagn.

Klagerne har henvist til Retten i Holstebros dom af 22. juni 2013

i sagen, anklagemyndigheden mod Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt.

Ifølge klagerne er de letgenkendelige i artiklen, da det i artiklen

omtales, at de har haft deres gang i Kolding Valgmenighed. Der er kun

én valgmenighed i Kolding. De er således del af en forholdsvis lille per-

sonkreds på højst 100-150 personer i valgmenigheden.

Klagerne har anført, at Kristeligt Dagblad burde have kontaktet

dem, inden artiklen blev offentliggjort, så de kunne beskrive deres ver-

sion af historien. TV MIDTVEST kontaktede dem således, inden de of-

fentliggjorde historien, selvom de heller ikke her var nævnt ved navn i

omtalen der.

Det forhold, at de ikke har indgivet en klage til Pressenævnet

over tidligere omtale, skal ikke opfattes som en accept af omtalen. Kla-

gerne havde ikke kendskab til omtalen i de lokale medier som Folkebla-

det Lemvig, som Kristeligt Dagblad henviser til.

2.2 Kristeligt Dagblads synspunkter

Kristeligt Dagblad har anført, at artiklen beskriver et voksende

fænomen i tematisk form, som består i, at præster udsættes for trusler

og chikane. Som et eksempel herpå refererer artiklen sognepræst Jonas

Serner-Pedersens personlige oplevelser med at være udsat for telefon-

chikane fra to personer, hvis navne ikke optræder i artiklen, og som

alene beskrives som ”to personer fra sin tidligere valgmenighed i Kol-

ding.

Grundlæggende skal pressen som led i sin samfundsmæssige

opgave belyse forskellige retslige forhold, herunder hvordan faggrupper,

i dette tilfælde præster, oplever og håndterer chikane. Hvis et medie i en

sådan sammenhæng ikke nøgternt og sobert kan beskrive, hvad en

sognepræst har været udsat for (når den part, der står bag chikanen,

ikke bliver identificeret i beskrivelsen) vil det medføre en urimelig og

usaglig beskæring af pressens faktiske muligheder for at belyse et sam-

fundsmæssigt relevant fænomen.

Det vil videre udgøre en urimelig og usaglig beskæring af sogne-

præst Jonas Serner-Pedersens ytringsmuligheder - og dermed i princip-

pet alle chikaneofres ytringsmuligheder - hvis han ikke kan fortælle,

hvad han har oplevet i en sag af så stor grovhed, at den har udløst poli-

titilhold, der skal beskytte hans person og ejendom, og senere bøde-

straffe for overtrædelser af tilholdet. Kristeligt Dagblad bemærker vide-

re, at klagerne ikke bestrider eksistensen af et polititilhold. Polititilhol-

det skyldes, at Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har udøvet chikane

mod sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen, ved blandt andet at have fore-

taget ”100 ubehagelige opkald om dagen” og indtalt ”12 timers chikane

på telefonsvareren”, hvilket fremgår af artiklen. I 2013 blev de to perso-

ner, som efter alt at dømme er identiske med klagerne, idømt bødestraf

for overtrædelse af polititilholdet ved fortsat at chikanere Jonas Serner-

Pedersen. Der er i den forbindelse henvist til artiklen ”Mand og kvinde

idømt bøder for præstechikane” den 20. juni 20 13 på folkebladetlem-

vig.dk.

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har ikke bestridt, at chika-

nen er foregået, og under alle omstændigheder er der tale om, at det er

faktuelle forhold, Jonas Serner-Pedersen beskriver.

Disse forhold har i øvrigt været omtalt i andre medier, inden Kri-

steligt Dagblad bragte sin artikel. Det forhold, at klagerne ikke har kla-

get til Pressenævnet før nu, må bestyrke offentligheden i, at de omtalte

former for chikane har fundet sted og indgår i grundlaget for polititil-

holdet. Kristeligt Dagblad har henvist til artiklerne ”Chikane fortsætter

mod præst trods politi-tilhold” den 13. december 20 15 på dagbladet-

holstebro-struer.dk, ”Præst chikaneres: ] 00 opkald og 12 timers telefon-

svarerbeskeder” den 14. december 2015 på dr.dk og ”Sognepræsten i

Hjerm ved ikke, hvad han skal stille op, efter han i tre år har levet med

chikane” den 14. december 2015 på tvmidtvest.dk.

Vedrørende forelæggelsen har Kristeligt Dagblad anført, at Dani-

ela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt ikke nævnes ved navn i artiklen, og at

artiklen ikke gør det muligt at identificere dem uden for en snæver

kreds af mennesker, hvorfor Kristeligt Dagblad ikke fandt anledning til

at forelægge oplysningerne. Dette ville svare til, at medierne ved omtale

af retslige forhold kan referere, at der er rejst tiltale, uden at mediet er

forpligtet til at forelægge indholdet af sigtelsen eller tiltalen for den om-

talte med henblik på en udtalelse.

Kristeligt Dagblad kendte ikke til klagernes identitet, før de selv

henvendte sig til Kristeligt Dagblad. Avisen har fremlagt en mail af 9.

marts 2016, som er sendt til hundredvis af personer og organisationer,

herunder kongehuset, ministerier, danske og udenlandske medier m.fl.

I mailen udbreder de selv budskabet om, at de står bag chikanen af

sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen.

Vi er whistleblowere. Pressenævnet stiller sig her på dommerbænken ved

at afgøre, at det er alt sammen er en sag om chikanerier. Det er ikke pressens

opgave. Erik Bjerager kalder os sindsforvirrede. Vi har svaret, t vi ville være

sindsforvirrede, hvis vi benægtede at der er polititilhold på os. Vi er udsat

for embedsmisbrug af Jonas Serner-Pedersen og det danske politi, som han

har brugt imod os. Det er chikane fra hans side mod os, ikke at ville tale med

os, men at bruge politiet i stedet for. Pressenævnet kan ikke fælde dom i

sagen som en dom mod os ud i hele Danmark i deres kendelse, at vi vedstår

at vi udøver chikanerier. De puster en sag op, helt ude af proportioner.

Vi har ret til at henvende os til Jonas Serner-Pedersen

om hans administrative arbejde. Man taler med folk. Man hænger ikke folk

fra sin gamle menighed ud som stalkere, hvis man er en ansvarsfuld præst

og sit embede voksen. Det er Pressenævnets ansvar, at I ikke udøver ordentlig

research. Pressenævnet har ikke ret til at pålægge os at være enige i begrebet

chikanerier. Det siger kun noget om jeres meget overfladiske research.

(vores kursivering og kommentar).

Kristeligt Dagblad har ikke ”sværtet” klagerne til. De optræder

ikke i artiklen ved navns nævnelse. Selv hvis de havde været identifice-

ret i artiklen, ville det ikke være ”tilsværtning” at gengive faktuelle op-

lysninger om årsagen til polititilholdet.

3 Pressenævnets begrundelse og afgørelse:

I sagens behandling har følgende nævnsmedlemmer deltaget:

Martin Lavesen, Hans Peter Blicher, Lene Sarup og Marlene Borst Han-

sen.

Retlig interesse

Det er en betingelse for at klage til Pressenævnet, at klageren

har retlig interesse i det forhold, der klages over. Det indebærer, at man

selv som person, organisation, virksomhed eller lignende skal være om-

talt, afbilledet eller på anden måde identificeret i mediet.

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt er efter det oplyste de omtal-

te ”to personer fra sin [præsten Jonas Serner-Pedersens] tidligere valg-

menighed i Kolding”. Pressenævnet finder derfor, at Daniela Skov og

Lars Skov Krøgholt har en sådan retlig interesse i at klage over artiklen,

at der er grundlag for at behandle klagen.

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt har klaget over, at Kristeligt

Dagblad ikke kontaktede dem for at høre deres version, inden avisen

offentliggjorde artiklen.

God presseskik

Det følger af de vejledende regler for god presseskik, at det er

mediernes opgave at bringe korrekt og hurtig information. Så langt det

er muligt, bør det kontrolleres, om de oplysninger, der gives eller gengi-

ves, er korrekte. Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller

virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden

de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende, jf.

punkterne A. 1 og A.3.

Ifølge den påklagede artikel havde sognepræsten Jonas Serner-

Pedersen modtaget 100 opkald om dagen, og der var indtalt 12 timers

tale på præstens telefonsvarer. Klagerne har afvist, at de skulle have

henvendt sig i det beskrevne omfang.

På baggrund af Retten i Holstebros dom af 20. juni 2013 i sagen,

anklagemyndigheden mod Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt, lægger

Pressenævnet til grund, at Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt blev

idømt en bødestraf for at have overtrådt politiets advarsel om ikke at

henvende sig til Jonas Serner-Pedersen (overtrådt et tilhold). Efter det

oplyste er sagen behandlet i overensstemmelse med princippet om of-

fentlighed i retsplejen.

Daniela Skov blev dømt for at have sendt, indtalt og mailet et

ukendt antal beskeder til præsten i december 2012 og for at have ind-

talt en besked og sendt 57 sms’er i januar 2013, ligesom hun blev dømt

for at have sendt 133 sms’er fra 19.-23. februar 2013.

Lars Skov Krøgholt blev dømt for at have sendt en sms og tre e-

mails i januar 2013 og for at have sendt to sms’er og foretaget fire tele-

fonopkald til Jonas Serner-Pedersen i februar 2013.

Sådan som sagen foreligger oplyst, er det ikke over for Presse-

nævnet dokumenteret, at der er foretaget 100 opkald på én dag til

Jonas Serner-Pedersen og indtalt 12 timers tale på hans telefonsvarer.

Under hensyn til klagernes dom og gentagne henvendelser til

Jonas Sterner-Pedersen finder Pressenævnet, at oplysningerne i artiklen

ikke er uden faktisk grundlag. Det samme gælder udsagnene ”ubehage-

lige”, ”ondsindede”, ”føres bag lyset” og ”skummel person”, der fremstår

som Jonas Serner-Pedersens subjektive vurderinger. Pressenævnet fin-

der herefter hverken grundlag for at kritisere, at Kristeligt Dagblad om-

talte sagen som en ”chikanesag” eller tilstrækkeligt grundlag for at kriti-

sere, at avisen ikke kontrollerede oplysningerne i artiklen yderligere in-

den offentliggørelsen.

Pressenævnet finder, at præsten Jonas Serner-Pedersen havde

ret til at fortælle sin historie om problemer med chikane, der også har

offentlig interesse. Pressenævnet finder, at det ikke kan udelukkes, at

det vil være muligt for personer, som i forvejen har kendskab til sagen

at identificere klagerne ud fra-oplysningerne i artiklen, men bemærker,

at de alene omtales som to personer fra Kolding Valgmenighed, der efter

det oplyste består af mellem 100 og 150 personer. Nævnet udtaler der-

for ikke kritik af Kristeligt Dagblad for at bringe præstens historie uden

at anonymisere klagerne yderligere.

Nævnet udtaler ikke kritik.

-ooOoo-

Udskriftens rigtighed bekræftes.

København, den 13. april 2O 16

(underskrevet)

Mette Pedersen

Det falder tilbage på byens kommune, når dens biskop er direkte involveret og holder hånden over politi løgne fra den præst, som det er hans ansvar at føre tilsyn med.

Med venlig hilsen Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende..."

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare."

Pressenævnet undlader FULDSTÆNDIG at fremføre og kommentere, at Chefredaktør Erik Bjerager, Kristeligt Dagblad kalder os sindsforstyrrede!!!

Han behøvede kun, som vi har sagt mange mange gange, behøvede at mødes med os i 15-20 minutter og afslutte sine administrative pligter før han forlod sin tidligere præsteansættelse i Kolding. Det var et nemt og ikke særlig farligt stykke arbejde for ham at udføre. Vi er ikke farlige, så hvorfor misbruge STATSMIDLER og inddrage politiet lige så vel som RETTEN, og lige så vel som utallige kostbare skrivelser fra mere end en STATSADVOKAT i Viborg?

Det er for os meget alvorligt, at det er politikeren Marlene Borst Hansen, der lægger navn til og stempler os i en sag, hvor der ikke er lavet en grund research fra Pressenævnets og Kristeligt Dagblads side i henhold til A.1 og A.3 i Presseansvarsloven.

Oplysninger, som kan være skadelige, krænkende eller virke agtelsesforringende for nogen, skal efterprøves i særlig grad, inden de bringes, først og fremmest ved forelæggelse for den pågældende. Forelæggelse bør ske således, at der gives den adspurgte rimelig tid til at svare."

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply.

Hverken biskopper, provster eller præster , det inkluderer Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen ejer Kirken.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

Jonas Serner-Pedersen er tjenestemand i statens kirke. Han gik til politiet 19. september 2012, og fik en betjent til at ringe Daniela Skov op, som sagde ”Jeg har Sognepræst Jonas Serner-Pedersen fra HJERM stående her på stationen. Han siger du hører ikke til i hans menighed”. " er du forelsket i ham?" Spørger han på grov måde og han optræder på brutal og grov måde og giver mig ikke mulighed for at svare selvom han spørger, hvad jeg er i gang med, når jeg kontakter Jonas. Vi havde mailet og tilbudt Jonas den dag, at vi ville komme op til HJERM og så kunne han færdiggøre det administrative papirarbejde til os enkelt uden at han behøvede at køre til Kolding. I stedet farer han op til Politiet - helt ude af for os logiske proportioner.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Love-og-regler/Regler-for-god-presseskik.aspx

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

Kolding, April 23-2016

Dear Minister of Justice Søren Pind.

We also send this separately to you and submit the case to you, now we cannot bear more. We ask you to help us and create order and bring an end to this.

We are submitted to abuse of power and Office from police and police lies so that we have lost our legal rights as citizens in Denmark starting because a policeman refuses to reveal his identity. Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen knows his IDENTITY and he must have carried out lawful journal writing back in September 2012.

You have said at a point in 2015 that you will get to the bottom of the particular cases concerning police lies. We hold you up on that. We are not able to live with things proceed from worse to worse.

Press Council and the nationwide Kristeligt Dagblad Newsmagazine has stigmatized us throughout Denmark. They bring on us their allegation that we agree to the alleged from fx Erik Bjerager and more that we are harassing pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen in Hjerm.

That is not at all our view on things!

We have asked him to take responsibility for his administrative duty. To write to us an UNSUBSCRIPTION receipt proving what he did to our documents that held our personal social Security Numbers on them and he had issued the documents to us in our UNSUBSCRIPTION from the Church. Then we returned the documents to him to sign! And then he hid himself behind POLICE RESTRAINT ORDERS so we could not receive any answer from him, what he did with these our documents.

It should be possible to unsubscribe from any church without getting a police restraining order from the Pastor.

Instead, he subscribed us into the State church for two years until we ourselves DISCOVERED this. Subscribed us into the STATE Church without our knowledge and without our consent. Thus we paid church taxes for two years for a Christianity RELIGION with a BAPTISM THEOLOGY, we fervently hate and oppose to, we do not want to be a part of. - Speaking of highly relevant campaigning from Atheistic Society:

"Why should faith cost anything?"

Kind Regards,

Daniela Skov og Lars Skov Krøgholt.

In the newspaper “Information” for yesterday the FRONT PAGE is devoted to the theme that the police is lying. It is not good for us citizens and it is abusive that their Bishop does not care that he and Jonas take advantage of police lie so Jonas shall not speak with us about his unconstitutional enrolment of us in the State religion and State Church as we expressly did not want to be enrolled in! And we are experiencing it very disrespectful against us and against the citizens of Hjerm that they do not take care of the removal of police restraining order and take it seriously that the police are lying and denying us citizens-PARTY CONSULTATION despite the recommendation of the public prosecutor in VIBORG, Senior Prosecutor Merete Sanning ‼ It falls back on the city's municipality, when its Bishop is directly involved and keeps the hand of police lies from the pastor, as it is his responsibility to supervise. If they disclaim that they are part of politics and society, then the rest of us are just toys for them. Maybe that is why they do not believe they need to take responsibility for the impact their lives have in their fellow citizens ' lives. It is a total misconception that they can sign up out of society and say that we have nothing to do with politics. We are not all included in the political life of our society, just as to be citizens in our country? When the parish pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen and Bishop Henry Stubkjær is involved together with the police in to deny us the consultation of interested parties, and in that we have lost our legal security as citizens in Denmark, so says the Bishop and the parish priest not as someone who stay out of politics, but they stand as CHURCH representatives of LAWLESSNESS and ANARCHY!!! With best regards Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

We would like to know if member of the Press Board Marlene Borst Hansen is the politician from the party “Det Radikale Venstre”, born in Kolding? The Press Board justifies Kristeligt Dagblad to speak in a manner "Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held" about us. Jonas Serner-Pedersen is an official employee in The STATE Church. We are not DERANGED AND WE ARE NOT STALKERS HARRASSING A PASTOR AND WE DO NOT ACT IN A DERANGED MANNER OR AGREE TO BEING PEOPLE WHO ARE HARRASSING JONAS SERNER-PEDERSEN as stated in the ruling from the Press board. We expect of a pastor to take his RESPONSIBILITY according to his official State Employement.

It is very serious for us and powerful against us that the verdict as the ruling of the Press Board with a politician from the Radical Left Party in it, is a verdict which is effective out in society. The courts are the JURIDICIARY power in Denmark, but the Press Board is allowing that we 2 Danish citizens are being treated in a prejudicial way and hung out to dry throughout Denmark , even convicted without proper lawful police INTERROGATION - we are DENIED being subject to the Principle Of Legality - as well as being subjected to abuse of power.

The Parliament is the Executive power and it is abuse of power from a politician’s end that a former member of Parliament signs her name to a ruling with such lack of research behind: "

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply."

The Press Board ENTIRELY fails to mention and comment that Editor in Chief Erik Bjerager, Kristeligt Dagblad names us deranged.‼‼‼‼

We have lost our legal rights in Denmark, and Jonas Serner-Pedersen abuse the state police against us. The principle of legality is violated entirely, because we are given a VERDICT with no legal police interrogation.

Kristeligt Dagblad and the Press Board cut out elements - of the Transcript from the COURT in HOLSTEBRO June 2013. That causes Kristeligt Dagblad to bring a story that is entirely different from anything we are part of. They use US as anonymous parties in a TALE OR GOSSIP STORY. We are not part in the version with such lack of factuality and lack of TRUTH WHAT IS ALLOWED TO TAKE PLACE IN DENMARK From PASTOR AND BISHOP IN THE STATE CHURCH AND STATE POLICE AND STATE ATTORNEY IN VIBORG AS WELL AS COURT SYSTEM.

The ruling of the Press Board places a judgement in the entire case when they allow themselves to write: “In the email they themselves disseminate the message that they are behind the harassment of Parish pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen”.

Here it is the Press Board who with a Radical Left Party politician on the Board gives a sentence as their RULING in OUR case, for we do not agree to harassing Jonas Serner-Pedersen.

He only as said many many times by us needed to meet with us 15-20 minutes and finish his administrative duty before he left his former Pastoral employment in Kolding. That was an easy and not very dangerous piece of work for him. We are not dangerous so why abuse STATE finances and drag in Police as well as COURT as well as numerous costly writings from more than one STATE ATTORNEYs in Viborg?

It is very serious that it is the politician Marlene Borst Hansen, who adds her name to it and stigmatize us in a case where there has not been made thorough research by the Press Board and Kristeligt Dagblad in accordance with the paragraphs A.1 and A.3 in the Press Ethical Rules.

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Both the Press Council and Erik Bjerager / Kristeligt Dagblad can easily recognize without destroying us with the word : DERANGED‼ Name calling us deranged! It is by purpose DELIBERATELY to:" detract from US. the respect in which individuals should be held"

In opening all the links, to the website that we so frequently refer to: "Freedom of Speech> Freedom of expression." It is your responsibility that you represent us in an insulting manner by the way Erik Bjerager, Jonas Serner Pedersen and his superior bishop Stubkjær in Viborg is shaming and blaming us for revealing into a full PUBLIC light as whistle-blowers what takes place in the Church in Denmark. Neither Bishops deans or pastors including Pastor Jonas Serner- Pedersen are the owners of the Church!

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

In Transcript from Court meeting in HOLSTEBRO in 2013 it says, that Jonas Serner-Pedersen was expelled from Kolding Valmenighed.= KOVA which is the Congregation he was pastoring in Kolding. Expelled

That is the Courts expression of him being fired from his employment by the Leadership in KOVA. We are not impudent people who lie in Court.

In the Transcript they write that Jonas Serner-Pedersen refused to take part in revealing unlawful matters. We are whistle-blowers, and we have revealed unlawful matters that took place to a broad line of mail recipients.

Jonas Serner- Pedersen is official employee in the STATE Church. He went to the Police on September 2012 and had a police officer call Daniela Skov, and tell her: "Pastor at HJERM Parish Jonas Serner-Pedersen is here at this precinct and he says that you do not belong to his congregation." " Are you in love with him.?" The policeman barked at me 3 times. He treated me in a brutal manner and tone and he said "Hmpf" when he asked me why I contacted Jonas and instead of allowing me to answer. I had no way of being taken serious as a citizen and I was terribly shocked by the entire situation.

We had WRITTEN THAT DAY WE WOULD COME UP TO HJERM SO WE COULD finish the administrative paper duty and make it easy for Jonas he would not have to come to Kolding.

Instead he races to the Police - totally for us far from any logical proportions.

Marlene Borst Hansen stigmatizes us through her position that she indeed is a former MP in Denmark.

We are just two ordinary citizens against her as a politician. SO her name is extra strong, the SIGNAL VALUE against us is powerful, when it is from a. Political official stand denouncing of our liability and CREDIBILITY politically towards us two Danish citizens Opposite from the liability and CREDIBILITY of the STATE OFFICIAL EMPLOYEE PASTOR JONAS SERNER.-

Our latest experience in the case of legal advice was Senior Prosecutor, State Attorney in Viborg, Merete Sanning gave to us favour that the police should give us hearing of evidence in the case. That we had not been interrogated before the VERDICT against us, which is very very serious.

Merete Sanning, STATE ATTORNEY wrote this to the police - they never wanted to take us for interrogation. Again, we just got the answer from the Mid -and -West Jutland -Police precinct they considered it a case TOTALLY closed. It has all been an entirely abuse of power against us ordinary citizens.

Jonas Serner Pedersen has not taken care of documents that were of importance to us. Our Social Security numbers were on these documents. Our inquiries to Jonas Serner Pedersen was to talk about these papers. What had happened to our documents?????

Therefore, neither the Press Council or the nationwide newsmagazine KRISTELIGT ( Christian) Dagblad can make a RIGHTFUL allegation that we agree to participate in harassment of Jonas Serner Pedersen, it is a judgment the Ruling traps us in.

We wrote as an answer to Erik Bjerager about his claim that we are deranged, that we would be insane if we denied that there is a police restraining order on us. We call for a thorough research from the Christian Dagblad editorial persons in charge.

According to what is said in Press Council A.1 and A.3.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Ruling

from

Press Board

In case No. 16-70-00934

Daniela Skov and

Lars Skov Krøgholt

Against

Kristeligt Dagblad

on Tuesday, 12 April 2016 Press Board gave the following

Order

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt have complained about the article

“Harassed pastors missing help” brought on the 15. December 2015 at

kristeligt-dagblad.dk and the 16. December 2015 in print version Kristeligt

Dagblad, since they believe that good press usage is overridden.

Facts

Kristeligt Dagblad brought respectively on 15. and 16. December

20 15 article "Harassing priests missing help" on its home page

and in the newspaper. Of the Sub-Division is apparent from the following:

Threats and persecution of pastors is an increasing problem, points

Pastor's Association after harassment case. There is a lack of central action

in order to deal with the problem.

The text shows the following:

100 nasty calls per day. 12 hours of harassment on the voice mail.

The parish pastor in Hjerm parish in Western Jutland, Jonas

Serner-Pedersen, has in three years been harassed by two persons

from his previous church in Kolding. The two have gotten a police-

restraining order, but now instead direct the spiteful messages against

the pastor's parishioners in Hjerm.

They talk about how bad a person I am, and that they are being

deceived, because I am a sinister person. It is very tiring, and

I think it is really uncomfortable that it goes beyond

the people who live in this parish, "says Jonas Serner-

Pedersen.

[Article continues with other publicity than about complainants and

the pastor in West Jutland, within the article continues:]

It has not been possible to get a comment from Ministry of

Church, but Henrik Stubkjær, who is Bishop of Jonas Serner-

Pedersen in Viborg Diocese, does not miss an action plan for vulnerable

pastors:

Steps have been taken to assist the pastor in question, and my

impression is that the cases will be so individual that they can be

difficult to capture in a single plan of action. But when the case has an

extent as the mentioned case, it will be natural that the Bishop

shall convene a comprehensive meeting with the relevant authorities, "

says the Bishop. "

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt complained the 23. February

2016 for Kristeligt Dagblad, who 24. February rejected the complaint.

The complaint is received in the Press board 25. February 2016.

More Information

Of Law in Holstebro's judgment of 20. June 2013 in the case, the Prosecutor-

against Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt, it appears that

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt recognized and were convicted of having

violated the police warning not to turn to Jonas Serner-

Pedersen (violated a restraining order). They were both sentenced to fines and imposed

to pay the costs of the case.

Daniela Skov was convicted for having sent, voiced and emailed an

unknown number of messages to the pastor in December 2012, for having voiced

a message and sent 57 text messages in January 2013, just as she was convicted of

having sent 133 SMS from 19.-23. February 2013.

Lars Skov Krøgholt was convicted for having sent an SMS and three e-

mails in January 2013 and for having sent two text messages and made four tele-

phone calls to Jonas Serner-Pedersen in February 2013.

Of the judgment it appears that the complainants explained that they had

contacted Jonas Serner-Pedersen, because he had to send them

some papers, but he had remained passive.

2 the parties ' views

2.1 Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt’s views

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt have stated that they are in the article

described as "two people from his previous church in Kolding", and

they supposedly would have made "100 nasty calls a day”

and recorded " 12 hours of harassment on the answering machine " through the past

three years.

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt has acknowledged having had

turned to the pastor through phone calls, text messages and e-mails, but they

has denied having approached him to the extent described in the article. The

approached in order to get some paper work done and Kristeligt Dagblad is

mistaken, when the newspaper describes the situation as facts. The words "nasty”,

" harassment "," malicious "," deceive "," sinister person "

do not describe their intention with the queries and are subjective statements.

The complainants have referred to the Court of first instance in Holstebro's judgment of 22. June 2013

in the case, the Prosecutor's Office against Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt.

According to the complainants, they are easily found from the article, as it is in the article

mentioned that they have had their whereabouts in the church in Kolding. There is only

one such church in Kolding. They are thus part of a relatively small group of persons

of not more than 100-150 persons in the Church.

The complainants have indicated that the Kristeligt Dagblad ought to have contacted

them before the article was published, so they could describe their version

of the story. TV MIDTVEST contacted them so before they published

the story, even though they do not here was mentioned by name in the

the mention there.

The fact that they have not filed a complaint with the Press Board

over earlier mentions, should not be construed as an acceptance of the mention.

The complaintants did not have knowledge of the mention in the local media as Folke-

bladet Lemvig, as Kristeligt Dagblad refers to.

2.2 the Christian Newspaper views

Kristeligt Dagblad has stated that the article describes a growing

phenomenon in thematic terms, which consists in the fact that pastors are exposed to threats

and harassment. As an example, the article refers vicar Jonas

Serner-Pedersen’s personal experiences with exposure to phone-

harassment from two people, whose names do not appear in the article, and as

are only described as "two people from his previous Church in Kolding.

Fundamental to the press as part of its social

task is to illuminate different legal relationship, including how the professions,

in this case, the pastors, are experiencing and dealing with harassment. If a media in

such a context not soberly and sober can describe what a

parish pastor has been exposed to (when the party behind the harassment,

will not be identified in the description) it would result in an unfair and

arbitrary cropping of the actual possibilities for the press to illuminate a

socially relevant phenomenon.

It will further constitute an unfair and arbitrary cropping of parish-

Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen's free speech opportunities - and thus in principle

all the freedom of speech of all victims of harassment - if he cannot tell,

what he has experienced in a case of so much gravity that it has triggered a police

restraint, to protect his person and property, and later fine-

penalties for violations of said police restraint. Kristeligt Dagblad furthermore notes

that the complainants did not dispute the existence of a police restraining order. The

police restraint is due to the fact that Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt have engaged

in harassment against the parish pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen, by among other things having

made "100 unpleasant calls a day" and recorded "12 hours of harassment

on the answering machine ", as evidenced by the article. In 2013, the two persons

who by all accounts are identical with the complainants, were sentenced to fines

for violation of the police restraining measures by continuing to harass Jonas Serner-

Pedersen. In this context we reference to the article "Man and woman

fined for harassment of pastor "on 20. June 2013 on folkebladetlemvig.dk

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt does not deny that the harassment

has taken place, and in any case we are talking about, that it is

factual circumstances, which Jonas Serner-Pedersen describes.

These conditions have also been featured in other media before Kri-

steligt Dagblad brought its article. The fact that the complainants have not complained

to Press the Board before now, must have convinced the public that the mentioned

forms of harassment have taken place and are part of the foundation of the

police restraint. Kristeligt Dagblad cited the articles "Harassment continues

against pastor despite police restraining order "on June 13. December 2015 on dagbladet-

holstebro-struer.dk, "Pastor harassed: 100 calls and 12 hours of voice

mail messages " on 14 October. December 2015 at dr.dk and "the vicar in

Hjerm does not know what he will do after he has lived with harassment

for three years "on 14 December 2015 at tvmidtvest.dk.

On the presentation Kristeligt Dagblad has noted that Daniela Skov

and Lars Skov Krøgholt are not mentioned by name in the article, and that

the article does not make it possible to identify them outside a narrow

circle of people, why Kristeligt Dagblad did not find it necessary

to present the information. This would be similar to the media by the mention

of legal matters can refer to an indictment, without the media is

required to provide the contents of the charge or indictment for the

indicted in order to giving an opinion.

Kristeligt Dagblad did not know of the complainants ' identity before they even

turned to Kristeligt Dagblad. The newspaper has put forward an email of 9.

March 2016, which is sent to hundreds of people and organizations,

including the Royal family, government ministries, Danish and foreign media and others.

In the email they themselves disseminate the message that they are behind the harassment of

Parish pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen.

Kristeligt Dagblad did not defame the complainants. They do not appear

in the article by their name. Even if they had been identified in

the article, it would not be a defamation to express factual

information about the cause of the police restraint.

3 Press the Board's reasoning and decision:

In these proceedings the following panelists have participated:

Martin Lavesen, Hans Peter Blicher, Lene Sarup Marlene Borst Hansen

Legal interest

It is a condition of filing a complaint to the Press Board that the

complainant has a legal interest in the matters complained of. It means that

they even as a person, organization, company or similar must be spoken

about, pictured, or otherwise identified in the media.

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt are according to what they have indicated

"two persons from his [Pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen's] past Church in Kolding ".

The Press Board therefore finds that Daniela Skov and

Lars Skov Krøgholt have such an interest in complaining about the article,

that is the basis for dealing with the complaint.

Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt have complained that Kristeligt

Dagblad did not contact them to hear their version before the newspaper

published the article.

Good press usage

It follows from the guiding rules of good press usage that it is

the media's job is to bring accurate and quick information. So far it

is possible, it should be checked whether the information given or

reproduced, is correct. Information, which can be harmful, offensive or

degrading for any person must be verified, in particular, before

they are brought, primarily by giving notice to the person in question,

cf. points A.1 and A.3.

According to the article complained about the parish pastor Jonas Serner-

Pedersen had received 100 calls a day, and there were spoken 12 hours

speech at the pastor's answering machine. The complainants have denied

to have approached in the described extent.

In the light of the Court in Holstebro's judgment 20. June 2013 in the case,

the prosecution against Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt,

The Press Board bases that Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt were

sentenced to a financial penalty for having violated the police warning not to

contact Jonas Serner-Pedersen (violated a restraining order). After what is

reported the matter is dealt with in accordance with the principle of

transparence in the courts.

Daniela Skov was convicted for having sent, voiced and emailed a

unknown number of messages to the pastor in December 2012 and for having

spoken one message and sent 57 text messages in January 2013, just as she was sentenced

for having sent 133 SMS from 19.-23. February 2013.

Lars Skov Krøgholt was convicted for having sent one SMS and three e-

mails in January 2013 and for having sent two text messages and made four

phone calls to Jonas Serner-Pedersen in February 2013.

Such as the case is informed, it has not to the Press Board been

demonstrated that they have made 100 calls in one day to Jonas

Serner-Pedersen and spoken 12 hours of voice mail on his answering machine.

Having regard to the complainants ' verdict and repeated inquiries to

Jonas Sterner-Pedersen the Press Board finds, that the information in the article

is not without basis in fact. The same applies to statements "unpleasant”

" malicious "," kept behind the light " and " sinister person " that stands out

as Jonas Serner-Pedersen's subjective assessments. The Press Board

then neither finds the basis for criticizing that the Kristeligt Dagblad

spoke of the matter as a "harassment case" or sufficient basis to criticize

that the newspaper did not control the information in the article further

in advance of the publication.

The Press Board finds that the pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen had

the right to tell his story about problems with harassment, which also has

public interest. The Press Board finds that it cannot be excluded that

it will be possible for people who already have knowledge of the facts

to identify the complainants on the basis of information in the article, but notes that

they alone are referenced to as two people from that particular church in Kolding that after

what according to information given consists of between 100 and 150 people. The Board will

therefore pronounce no criticism of the Kristeligt Dagblad for bringing the

pastor’s story without anonymizing the complainants further.

The

Board will pronounce no criticism.

-ooOoo-

Printed output accuracy is confirmed.

Copenhagen, 13. April 2016

(signed)

Mette Pedersen

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

The Parliament is the Executive power and it is abuse of power from a politician’s end that a former member of Parliament signs her name to a ruling with such lack of research behind: "

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply."

The Press Board ENTIRELY fails to mention and comment that Editor in Chief Erik Bjerager, Kristeligt Dagblad names us deranged.‼‼‼‼

The verdict of the Press Board places a judgement in the entire case when they allow themselves to write: “In the email they themselves disseminate the message that they are behind the harassment of Parish pastor Jonas Serner-Pedersen”.

Here it is the Press Board who with a Radical Left Party politician on the Board gives a sentence as their RULING in OUR case, for we do not agree to harassing Jonas Serner-Pedersen.

Information which may be prejudicial or insulting or detract from the respect in which individuals should be held shall be very closely examined before publication, primarily by submission to the person concerned.Submission should be made so as to give the person concerned a reasonable time to reply.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Both the Press Council and Erik Bjerager / Kristeligt Dagblad can easily recognize without destroying us with the word : DERANGED‼ Name calling us deranged! It is by purpose DELIBERATELY to :" detract from US. the respect in which individuals should be held"

In opening all the links, to the website that we so frequently refer to : "Freedom of Speech> Freedom of expression." It is your responsibility that you represent us in an insulting manner by the way Erik Bjerager, Jonas Serner Pedersen and his superior bishop Stubkjær in Viborg is shaming and blaming us for revealing into a full PUBLIC light as whistleblowers what takes place in the Church in Denmark. Neither Bishops deans or pastors including Pastor Jonas Serner- Pedersen are the owners of the Church!

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

In Transcript from Court meeting in HOLSTEBRO in 2013 it says, that Jonas Serner-Pedersen was expelled from Kolding Valmenighed.= KOVA which is the Congregation he was pastoring in Kolding. Expelled

That is the Courts expression of him being fired from his employment by the Leadership in KOVA. We are not impudent people who lie in Court.

We had WRITTEN THAT DAY WE WOULD COME UP TO HJERM SO WE COULD finish the administrative paper duty and make it easy for Jonas he would not have to come to Kolding.

Instead he races to the Police - totally for us far from any logical proportions.

Marlene Borst Hansen stigmatizes us through her position that she indeed is a former MP in Denmark.

We are just two ordinary citizens against her as a politician. SO her name is extra strong, the SIGNAL VALUE against us is powerful , when it is from a. Political official stand denouncing of our liability and CREDIBILITY politically towards us two Danish citizens Opposite from the liability and CREDIBILITY of the STATE OFFICIAL EMPLOYEE PASTOR JONAS SERNER.-

According to what is said in Press Council A.1 and A.3.

http://www.pressenaevnet.dk/Information-in-English/The-Press-Ethical-Rules.aspx

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse