Facts
The appellant [X.] was convicted by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne for defamation and violation of the sphere of privacy. The conviction is based on an incident in which the appellant made allegations of sexual abuse and group sex against her ex-partner [A.] and his guests, including [C.] and [D.] . Furthermore, she took a photo of [C.] and [A.] on the garden patio of [A.] 's house without their consent.
The appellant requests the annulment of the judgment and her complete acquittal. She claims that the lower court wrongly assessed her statements and the statements of the witnesses and that she had no serious reasons for her statements.
Considerations
The Federal Court examines the appellant's complaint that the lower court wrongly assessed her statements and the statements of the witnesses. It finds that the lower court considered the statements of witnesses [D.] and [A.] to be credible and that the appellant had no serious reasons for her statements.
The Federal Court also examines the appellant's complaint that the lower court wrongly considered the good faith evidence to have failed. It finds that the lower court considered the truth evidence to be admissible, but that the appellant had no serious reasons for her statements.
The Federal Court finally examines the appellant's complaint that the lower court wrongly considered the conviction for violation of the sphere of privacy to be justified. It finds that the lower court considered the offense of violation of the sphere of…