Alleged 'migrant attack' in Rīga not all it seemed to be

As previously reported by LSM, a woman named Ginta Vilcāne, told media that she was sexually assaulted while walking through central Rīga and that she believed the attackers were "migrants", as they were "dark skinned" – while noting her own long-standing opposition to migration on social media platform X saying: "Yesterday, unfortunately, I had to face the "kindness" of migrants myself in the center of Riga in the evening. When one had already started groping, the other was ready and had pulled out his genitals. I fought back until some man came running to save me. I've always been against migrants! Yes, feel free to call me a racist!" "Those savages (because that's exactly how they behave) must be stopped!" she said in a subsequent post. However, this account has now been called into question by State Police. "The State Police has completed the investigation into the criminal proceedings initiated in connection with information published on a social media site on June 27 about an alleged attack by migrants on a woman in the center of Rīga. The investigation has been completed and it has been established that the criminal offence did not occur. Initially, no one contacted the State Police about the circumstances that occurred, and only after public outcry, when police officers arrived at the woman's home, was an official application received to initiate criminal proceedings in accordance with Chapter 16 of the Criminal Law on criminal offenses against morality and sexual inviolability," said State Police on July 23rd. Police said they had undertaken "extensive investigations and operational activities" including "video recordings available in the urban environment, careful and detailed analysis and verification of all information obtained during the investigation, but the circumstances indicated by the woman regarding the performance of sexual acts have not been confirmed. Consequently, on Tuesday, July 21, a decision was made to terminate the criminal proceedings and at the same time a departmental investigation was initiated into possible deliberate false testimony and misleading the public." The State Police reminded the public that a post on social media is not equivalent to an official report to the State Police and in no way contributes to the overall public safety, public order and fair administration of law. The incident should probably also serve as a reminder to the wider public – and indeed the media – not to jump to conclusions just because a story seems particularly topical or happens to reinforce one's position on a given subject. State Police chief Armands Ruks told Latvian Television that police will try to determine whether the woman intentionally provided false information or misunderstood the situation. "People sometimes perceive things in a strange way or are unaware of what they perceive and then reflect to the public on social media how they perceived it," said Ruks. Coverage questioned The news comes two days after Latvia's public media ombudsman, Edmunds Apsalons, published his verdict on a complaint received about LSM's coverage of the original incident. The unnamed applicant had requested an assessment of whether the article had observed editorial diligence in clarifying the context of the source, namely whether the public media outlet had an obligation to disclose the political beliefs of the injured party – which were fairly clear given her extensive social media posts on the subject of migration, race and similar subjects, and her previous prominent position in a political party. After evaluating the submission in accordance with the LSM Editorial Guidelines, the public media ombudsman concluded that "the victim's previously publicly expressed political views had no factual connection with the alleged criminal offence, therefore the public media was not obliged to include this information in their publication." However, it did also note that coverage on LTV and LSM's Latvian-language portal did not "clearly separate the editorial message from the presentation of the victim's experience, nor does it fully mitigate the risk of stereotyping by using the term "migrants" in the headline." "When creating content on topics that polarize society, a clear editorial message is of particular importance – precise framing of the event, a consistent narrative, and appropriate contextualization, so as not to contribute to the formation of stereotypical and stigmatizing perceptions," said the Ombudsman. A detailed assessment of the coverage can be read in the ombudsman's opinion here.