On 28 July 2026, Lakmusz published the English-language version of its investigative article on the Motherless case, produced in cooperation with Qubit. I contributed to the article as a criminal law expert, commenting on the Hungarian and international legal aspects of the case.
The English publication makes the findings of the investigation, as well as the related questions of Hungarian criminal law, accessible to a broader international audience.
Lakmusz is a Hungarian fact-checking publication operated by Magyar Jeti Zrt. Its purpose is to provide verified information, examine the facts behind claims circulating in public discourse, and promote informed media consumption.
What is the Motherless case about?
The Motherless case became widely known in Hungary in 2024. According to information reported in the press, photographs of Hungarian women were uploaded to a pornographic website without their knowledge or consent.
Some of the images were accompanied by personal information. Others were digitally manipulated to depict the women with their throats slit. In several instances, the images were accompanied by violent comments referring to the killing or physical abuse of the women concerned.
A suspect in the case was apprehended in Berlin on 6 February 2025 as a result of cooperation between Hungarian cybercrime investigators and the Berlin police. Electronic devices and other data carriers were seized during the search of his residence. Investigations are being conducted in parallel by the Hungarian and German authorities. (Rendőrség)
The joint investigation by Lakmusz and Qubit describes how the suspect was identified, examines his social media activity and reports that some images of the women concerned remained accessible on other websites.
It is important to emphasise that the criminal proceedings are still ongoing. The suspect is therefore entitled to the presumption of innocence unless and until his criminal responsibility is established by a final court judgment.
Which legal questions did Lakmusz ask me to address?
The journalists primarily sought my opinion on the following criminal law issues:
- when the offence of misuse of personal data may be established;
- how the concept of “significant harm to a person’s interests” should be interpreted;
- the relationship between misuse of personal data and the new offence of online aggression;
- whether the rules on online aggression may be applicable to the Motherless case;
- which country should take the lead if the Hungarian and German authorities are conducting parallel investigations; and
- the practical reasons why an investigation involving a substantial volume of electronic evidence may take a considerable amount of time.
The right to control one’s personal data
The legal rules concerning the misuse of personal data are based on the principle that every individual has the right to exercise control over information relating to them.
Personal data may include a person’s name, image, telephone number, residential address and any other information through which that individual may be identified or associated with particular circumstances.
However, not every infringement of data protection rules constitutes a criminal offence. Under Section 219 of the Hungarian Criminal Code, criminal responsibility may arise where personal data are processed without authorisation or for an unauthorised purpose with a view to financial gain or in a manner that causes significant harm to the interests of the data subject. (Jogtár)
In my comments to Lakmusz, I pointed out that digitally altering and publishing a photograph of a real person so that she appears to have had her throat slit may constitute a particularly serious form of misuse of personal data.
Where the person concerned becomes aware of such an image and it causes serious anxiety, fear or other psychological consequences that have a material impact on her life, this may support a finding that significant harm has been caused to her interests.
Misuse of personal data and online aggression
The Motherless case is also closely connected with the new Hungarian criminal offence of online aggression.
Section 332/A of the Hungarian Criminal Code entered into force on 1 January 2025. In essence, it criminalises certain public online communications that express an intention or desire to cause the violent death of an identifiable person or to commit an offence against that person with particular cruelty. (Jogtár)
The new offence may, however, be applied only to conduct committed after it entered into force. Due to the prohibition of retroactive criminal legislation, conduct predating 1 January 2025 cannot subsequently be prosecuted as online aggression.
An important distinction also exists between the two offences.
Where misuse of personal data is based on significant harm to the data subject’s interests, it will generally be necessary for the person concerned to become aware of the unlawful processing. Without such knowledge, the processing will not normally have the required serious effect on that person’s life.
By contrast, the offence of online aggression does not require the targeted person to see the publication or to experience actual fear as a consequence of it.
The significance of the new offence is that it expressly identifies and independently criminalises the most serious forms of violent online communication. Depending on the circumstances, it may also be relevant to artificially generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes.
Hungarian or German criminal proceedings?
Criminal investigations have been initiated in both Hungary and Germany. In situations of parallel proceedings, the competent authorities must coordinate their work and determine in which country the case can be handled most effectively.
Relevant considerations may include:
- the location of the evidence;
- where witnesses and victims can be interviewed most effectively;
- the suspect’s place of residence;
- the nationality and residence of the persons concerned; and
- which authority is in the best position to obtain, examine and present the available evidence.
The principle of ne bis in idem must also be respected. In general terms, this principle prevents the same person from being finally tried or punished twice for the same conduct.
As I explained to Lakmusz, the decision on which country should ultimately conduct the main proceedings will largely depend on where the evidence can be collected and evaluated most effectively and where witnesses and victims can be heard with the least procedural difficulty. (Lakmusz)
Why can an investigation of this kind take so long?
Criminal proceedings based on electronic evidence are often particularly time-consuming.
The examination of seized mobile phones, computers, hard drives and other data-storage devices may require the involvement of forensic IT experts. Where a large quantity of data has been seized, the technical examination of the devices and the identification of legally relevant material may in themselves take a substantial amount of time.
The workload of the Hungarian investigative authorities may cause further delays. In this case, the authorities must also cooperate internationally, exchange information with their German counterparts and clarify the relationship between the two parallel investigations.
These factors may prolong proceedings even where the authorities already possess a considerable amount of evidence.
Criminal law expertise in the media
As a criminal defence lawyer, I am regularly approached by Hungarian and international media organisations in connection with ongoing or high-profile cases in which criminal legislation and law-enforcement practice need to be explained in an accessible but legally accurate manner.
The Motherless case clearly demonstrates that conduct committed in the online environment may simultaneously raise issues of data protection, personality rights, criminal law and international jurisdiction.
Digital evidence, conduct committed across national borders and victims living in several countries mean that the proper assessment of such cases requires not only experience in domestic criminal law but also an understanding of international criminal cooperation.
The full English-language investigative article by Lakmusz and Qubit is available here.
My detailed article on the offence of online aggression under the Hungarian Criminal Code is available here.
My article on the criminal offence of misuse of personal data is available here.
My previous media appearances are available here.
