The most unbelievable stories are not written by a screenwriter, but by life. Or, as Judge Christian Daimer would say: “There is nothing in court that is not there.” The 9th Criminal Chamber at the Munich I Regional Court had to decide whether it was actually the case that a 21-year-old had, according to him, had sexual intercourse with a 70-year-old prostitute on a cool October night in 2021 – or whether Joseph K. according to the public prosecutor’s office, she had simply followed and raped the woman. In the end, the court acquitted the accused of the charge of rape.
What happened that night could not be clarified “with certainty”, both parties involved lied. “Anyone who has doubts must not judge.” However, Joseph K. could not be happy about his regained freedom for long. Because immediately after the verdict, the public prosecutor announced that there was an arrest warrant against him from the immigration authorities.
A native of Sierra Leone, Joseph K. was charged with rape in conjunction with robbery and assault. In the end, a conviction for a fine for theft remained. In addition, the state must compensate the 23-year-old for the detention he suffered. “The process kept me very busy,” admits even the presiding judge. And the whole thing also frightened him: “Because without the videos from public transport, we would almost certainly have convicted the accused.”
The defendant allegedly consumed alcohol and drugs on a massive scale
The story that Joseph K. told sounded really unbelievable: first an alcohol consumption of nine beers, one and a half bottles of vodka, eight joints and two ecstasy tablets. “They should be with the angels,” judge Daimer commented. Then, according to K., around 3 a.m. in front of a hourly hotel near the main station, this woman asked him if he wanted to have sex. He gave her 150 euros. She said she was taking him home. So we got on the S-Bahn, later on the night bus. His sexual interest died out on the lighted-up train, and she insisted that he come with him. In Neuperlach she suggested “Quick-Sex” in a bush, he asked for 100 euros back. That’s why she called “help the police” after the sexual intercourse, he took her wallet and disappeared.
In camera, the woman testified at the hearing that Joseph K. approached her at the main train station, harassed and groped her on the train and bus, and when she got off the bus he followed her and raped her. At the same time he tugged at her handbag until the strap broke, then he fled.
Videos from the bus and train showed no harassment
The fact is that the police found jewelry from Joseph K.’s purse. And that his DNA evidence was found on her underwear. However, according to the court, it is also a fact that no signs of a struggle were found at the crime scene and that the victim did not call the police, but neighbors. The woman only reported a robbery and only reported a rape to the police two weeks later. “We don’t have any medical reports on possible injuries, and she hasn’t spoken to anyone about it either,” says Daimer. The question of why she was at the main train station at 3 a.m. could not be clearly clarified either. “But all of that,” according to the chamber, would not prove anything, “nevertheless, rape could have been possible.”
However, the videos from the bus and train spoke a different language: there was no harassment from his side, but rather that she was talking to him and even holding his arm when getting off the bus. “She lied to us,” Daimer says. And there was no longer any consistency in her statements about the alleged rape. Daimer also criticized the work of the police, who missed an investigative judge questioning the woman – and also did not view the videos from the means of transport.
“He came up with this version of the story after reading the files,” said co-plaintiff lawyer Claudia Wüllrich after the verdict. Her client was very upset, only later did she trust a police officer and tell her story. “She is a respectable woman, the defamation by the defendant is intolerable.”
Joseph K. accepted the verdict in the courtroom, the prosecutor did not comment on a possible revision. But for an arrest warrant from the immigration authorities. It had already been discussed during the proceedings that all of K.’s applications for asylum had been rejected. He was taken away again.