Sara Nilsson of Dumpen Convicted of Gross Defamation by Gothenburg Court

Gothenburg court sentences Dumpen publisher Sara Nilsson for gross defamation after exposing a man in online pedophile sting operation.

    Key details

  • • Sara Nilsson found guilty of gross defamation for exposing a man on Dumpen's website.
  • • Gothenburg District Court imposed a conditional sentence and fines totaling 14,400 kronor.
  • • Dumpen poses as minors online to expose alleged sexual predators, claiming to protect children.
  • • Critics argue Dumpen's actions can obstruct official investigations and risk wrongful accusations.
  • • The ruling is the first court decision on defamation claims against Dumpen since its 2021 inception.

Sara Nilsson, the responsible publisher of the Swedish website Dumpen, has been convicted of gross defamation by Göteborgs tingsrätt (Gothenburg District Court). The case, which unfolded over the last two years, involved a man in his 30s whose name, image, and CV were publicly exposed on Dumpen after he engaged in online sexual chats with a fictitious 14-year-old girl. The court aligned with a press freedom jury's finding that Nilsson's publication caused significant psychological distress to the man. As a result, Nilsson received a conditional sentence accompanied by daily fines totaling 14,400 kronor.

Dumpen operates by posing as minors in online chats to catch alleged sexual predators and claims its mission is to protect children from abuse. However, critics, including law enforcement and legal experts, argue Dumpen's vigilantism undermines formal investigations and poses risks of wrongful accusations that can have severe consequences, such as psychological harm and suicides. Despite numerous complaints since its launch in 2021 — about 130 to date — the Chancellor of Justice has not pursued defamation investigations against Dumpen, leaving such legal actions to individual complainants.

This verdict marks the first Swedish court ruling on defamation claims involving Dumpen, highlighting growing concerns over the balance between freedom of the press, vigilantism, and protecting individual rights. While Dumpen's representatives insist the ruling confirms their commitment rather than signaling failure, the case intensifies debate over the legality and ethical implications of their methods.

This article was translated and synthesized from Swedish sources, providing English-speaking readers with local perspectives.

Source comparison

Timeline of events

Sources report different timelines regarding when the defamation case was reported and when the ruling was made.

dn.se

"In late January, the press freedom jury concluded that Sara Nilsson was guilty of gross defamation."

svd.se

"Two years ago, Sara Nilsson was reported for defamation by a man whose name and image were published."

Why this matters: One source states the defamation case was reported two years ago, while the other indicates the press freedom jury's conclusion occurred in late January 2026. This discrepancy affects the understanding of the timeline surrounding the events.

The top news stories in Sweden

Delivered straight to your inbox each morning.