It is far from common for victims to be asked in court what punishment they consider appropriate for the accused. Of course, Markus Bader, presiding judge at the Nuremberg Regional Court, knows that too. He and his colleagues are responsible for the sentencing, no one else. Nevertheless, Bader simply wanted to know in the so-called cinnamon roll process: What do you ask the wife of the man who served her a cinnamon roll prepared with narcotics and almost killed her with it? considered appropriate for this act. The person addressed did not seem disconcerted, not even astonished at the question. She thought about that for a long time, she says. And no, unfortunately she doesn’t have a result: “I don’t know.”
The fact that one does not want to be in the shoes of criminal judges is a cliché. In the case of “cinnamon buns”, however, this is even more true than usual. This becomes clear after hearing the two pleadings from the public prosecutor and the defense. Both do not hold window sermons, both argue factually and coherently – and then come to judgments that on the one hand would result in a very long imprisonment. On the other hand, freedom, albeit initially that of a rehab facility. That too is rare.
What is undisputed in the process: A 39-year-old IT specialist from Erlangen loved his wife and had a child with her. His son is the greatest for him, the relationship is close on both sides, a classic dad-son. Then there’s gossip with the child’s mother, she wants to get a divorce, there is a dispute over access rights. The 39-year-old is only allowed to see his son on weekends, every 14 days also on Wednesdays. That is far too little for him, he wants to see it changed. Above all, giving the child away on Thursday, the bridging day, so to speak, affects him, he wants to have the son for a few days at a time. The mother refuses.
It is also undisputed that the 39-year-old prepared cinnamon rolls in November 2020. So baked goods, for which he was famous within the family, he always baked them on birthdays. It is also undisputed that he served his nephew with the first snails from the tin when he brought them to the train station; and then anesthetized two more snails from the same tray. With a powder from the Netherlands, not approved in Germany. He’d already used the remedy himself when he couldn’t sleep.
It is also undisputed that his wife was admitted to a clinic with paralysis and loss of speech because of the powder. And the 39-year-old’s mother-in-law, who wanted to clean up her daughter’s apartment after she was admitted to the clinic, still ate the remains of the cinnamon bun that she had eaten. And then almost died as a result.
The remedy was “far, far, far” overdosed
From then on the interpretations diverge widely. Without a doubt, says the defender, the 39-year-old made the “mistake of his life”. He just couldn’t have known that a high dose of the drug could even be fatal. The act made “little sense”, of course. But the 39-year-old had just hoped that his wife would be so bad on Thursday that she would no longer be able to look after the son if she took Snail and its medication on Wednesdays. The mother in law? The 39-year-old could never have guessed that she could eat the remains of a snail while cleaning up. Due to the pre-trial detention – eight months – the defendant is now to be released immediately into drug therapy.
The public prosecutor, on the other hand, demands nine years in prison. The remedy was “far, far, far” overdosed, the “20 times the daily maximum dose”, a danger to life is therefore clearly evident. It could not be assumed from the accused that he had only wished his wife a longer sleep – rather one “forever”. In the case of the mother-in-law, on the other hand, the public prosecutor no longer sees an intent to kill, in contrast to the indictment. But negligent assault.
Judge Bader considers all arguments of the public prosecutor’s office to be “stringent and understandable”. The defendant has to be detained for six years and three months for, among other things, attempted murder. Bader is certain that if both women had not eaten part of the snail, but one the entire snail, “only one of them would be sitting here today”. This was simply “a poisoned, sweet piece”, handed over with conditional resolution and out of insidiousness. The accused must still be “godly” that his son did not eat the snail. The “would not have survived,” says the judge. During the verdict, the 39-year-old puts his hands in front of his face, apparently fighting for composure. If it becomes legally binding, he will no longer be able to see his son in freedom for a long time.