https://innojairja.blogspot.com/2008/05/strange-case-of-anna-maria-galojan.html This is a blog post (dated 18 May 2008) arguing that Anna-Maria Galojan was rapidly branded a “thief/money smuggler” by major Estonian outlets after Eesti Ekspress broke the European Movement Estonia (EME) story, and that much of the press simply echoed the accusation without properly testing it. The authors claim the key accuser/driver was Riivo Sinijärv (described as president of the organisation and a former ambassador), that Galojan became the public “face” for spending/“Armani” narratives, and that the authors’ own digging suggested the money was stolen before she became CEO. It also alleges intimidation pressure (including an extreme claim that he told her to kill herself), suggests political/media interests benefited from the scandal by diverting attention from pressure on then-PM Andrus Ansip, and raises ethnic prejudice as a factor (she is described as Armenian and “not one of us”). It ends by noting a named prosecutor assigned to the case and promises to keep watching. Why it matters to her story: it’s an early, contemporaneous “counter-narrative” document that captures (a) how quickly the stigma formed in the press, (b) the claim that responsibility may have been misallocated in the public story, and (c) the idea that power networks and media incentives shaped the framing. It’s useful in Source Library terms as evidence of how the controversy was being contested in real time — but it’s also a high-opinion source (blog, loaded language, multiple serious allegations), so it’s best used as “this was alleged/argued at the time” rather than treated as a standalone proof document.