The story appears to be largely accurate, with several key facts supported by external sources. For instance, the identification of Voislav Torden as a Russian national and senior member of the Rusich group aligns with documented information about his role in the Wagner-linked paramilitary activities. The conviction and sentencing details, including the charges of war crimes and the life imprisonment verdict, are consistent with reports from credible sources such as Radio Free Europe and other international news outlets. However, certain elements, such as the exact number of soldiers killed and injured during the ambush, show minor discrepancies in numbers, which could be due to variations in reporting or updates in the legal proceedings. The story accurately mentions the use of universal jurisdiction by Finland and the decision to deny Ukraine's extradition request, which are crucial legal aspects that are consistently reported across various credible sources.

The story provides a reasonably balanced view by detailing both the prosecution's and Torden's positions. It includes Torden's consistent denial of the charges and his intention to appeal, which adds a necessary perspective to the narrative. However, the article could improve by including more context about the broader implications of this legal case, such as statements from international law experts or Ukrainian officials, to provide a more comprehensive view. The focus is heavily on the legal proceedings and the crimes, which might overshadow other relevant perspectives, such as the impact on the victims' families or the geopolitical ramifications.

The article is well-structured and uses clear, concise language that makes the complex legal proceedings accessible to a general audience. The logical flow of information, from the background of the case to the court's decision, helps readers follow the narrative without confusion. The tone is neutral and factual, which is appropriate for reporting on legal matters. However, some technical terms related to international law and jurisdiction might benefit from additional explanation for readers unfamiliar with these concepts.

The story references Finland's public broadcaster and a national newspaper, which are credible sources. However, it lacks direct citations or quotes from primary sources such as court documents or statements from involved parties, which would enhance the credibility of the reporting. The reliance on secondary reporting means that while the sources are reliable, the story could benefit from more direct evidence or statements to substantiate the claims further. Additionally, incorporating a broader range of sources, including international legal experts or human rights organizations, could provide a more nuanced understanding of the case.

The article provides a clear account of the charges and the legal reasoning behind the court's decision, which aids in transparency. However, it does not sufficiently disclose the methodology behind the reporting or the potential biases of the sources used. The lack of detailed information about how the facts were verified or the potential conflicts of interest in the reporting process could affect the reader's understanding of the story's impartiality. More explicit acknowledgment of these factors would enhance the article's transparency.