In a recent ruling by the courts in São Paulo, journalist José Luiz Datena has lost his lawsuit against influencer Pablo Marçal and has been ordered to pay R$ 10,000 in legal fees. The case was initiated after Datena sought R$ 100,000 in damages, claiming that Marçal defamed him by labeling him as a 'sugar eater' and a 'sexual aggressor.' This legal dispute emerged from a heated exchange during a televised debate where tensions escalated to physical confrontation, further fueling the public feud between the two candidates.

The altercation took place during the São Paulo mayoral campaign, where both Datena and Marçal were candidates but ultimately lost. The incident that sparked the legal action occurred when Marçal insulted Datena, leading to Datena's physical reaction. Following the confrontation, Marçal went live on social media to critique Datena's behavior, questioning his character and labeling him as a 'sexual harasser.' This public response intensified the scrutiny on both candidates and highlighted the contentious nature of local political campaigns.

The judge's decision indicates a definitive stance against Datena's claims, reinforcing the idea that political discourse, even when heated, is often subject to intense public comment. The order to pay legal fees suggests that the court viewed Marçal's statements within the realm of permissible political rhetoric rather than actionable defamation. This verdict could have implications for how political figures engage in aggressive public debates and the legal ramifications of their statements going forward.