Verdict
Life imprisonment for murder for right-wing radical mask refusers
Driven by hatred of the political system and the corona restrictions imposed by the state, a man takes up arms. According to the court, he chose his victim – a cashier – rather at random. The actual goal was completely different.
It was the murderous act of a right-wing extremist: The district court of Bad Kreuznach sentenced a person who refused to wear a mask to life imprisonment for the fatal shot at a gas station employee. The jury did not see a reduced criminal responsibility despite the considerable alcohol consumption of the 50-year-old in the act. The court followed the reasoning of the public prosecutor’s office.
But contrary to what the public prosecutor and the private prosecutor demanded, the district court did not find any particular severity of the guilt on Tuesday. In this case, a release of the now 50-year-old after 15 years in prison would have been legally possible, but practically impossible.
Lots of alcohol in the blood
The defense had rejected the charge of murder. The German’s two lawyers had pleaded for manslaughter with significantly reduced criminal responsibility of the accused, who, according to an expert, had around two per thousand alcohol in his blood at the time of the shot. The crime on September 18, 2021 at a gas station in Idar-Oberstein, Rhineland-Palatinate, caused horror across the country.
According to the court, the 50-year-old’s radical right-wing attitude and his hostility to the state were the main motives for the crime. He saw the cashier as a representative for the state and the Corona policy, which he saw as completely wrong. When the young man didn’t want to sell him a beer because he wasn’t wearing a mask, the 50-year-old decided to “make an example of him,” said presiding judge Claudia Büch-Schmitz.
The accused was aware that his actions would be recorded by surveillance videos and that he would end up behind bars, she said. But the 50-year-old wanted to set a sign of resistance against the state, the corona policy and the pandemic restrictions. Driven by his hatred of the political system and the government at the time, he chose his victim “more or less at random” because he had not been able to get to the then Chancellor Angela Merkel or Health Minister Jens Spahn (both CDU), the judge said, pointing out corresponding statements of the shooter in his police interrogation.
The judge went on to say that the convict had shown an “extreme attitude” towards corona and pandemic-related restrictions. For him, Covid-19 was nothing more than flu, and in his eyes the pandemic had been misused by politicians to restrict the freedoms of the people. The pandemic only reinforced his already existing anti-state sentiment. The 50-year-old had previously represented right-wing ideas and had a xenophobic and racist attitude. He was willing to sacrifice a human life for his political motives.
Great media interest
Chief Public Prosecutor Nicole Frohn was satisfied with the verdict. It is important that the court judged the crime to be murder and not manslaughter. The determination of a particular degree of guilt is a balancing issue in which the court came to a different conclusion than the prosecution. It is being examined whether an appeal should be lodged against the verdict.
In her plea, Frohn explained that the act almost exactly a year ago was the first time that deadly violence had occurred in Germany in connection with the corona measures. The great media interest in the criminal proceedings proves that the case continues to move the public.
Defense attorney Alexander Klein said the verdict reflected the public image of the case. His client was relieved that the guilt had not been found to be particularly serious and that the judgment gave him a perspective after 15 years. But he will check whether he will appeal because the judge’s verdict did not adequately acknowledge the mental state of the 50-year-old and the special circumstances of the crime, said Klein. In particular, the role of the “house and court expert” must be questioned again.
No recognizable emotion in the convict
The expert had stated that the accused was guilty despite the alcohol consumption. He also saw no signs of a pathological mental disorder, the loss of control or an adjustment disorder after the father’s suicide. The court followed suit.
The 50-year-old followed the verdict with his head bowed without any apparent emotion. The victim’s mother, who was a co-plaintiff in the trial, wept before the verdict was read at the sight of the many cameras around her. She later partially regained her composure and even answered questions from waiting journalists after the trial ended.
“First of all, we’re going to collect all the broken pieces that have fallen over the past few months,” said the 20-year-old’s mother, who appeared in person on many days of the hearing. Do you think the verdict is fair? “Honestly, 15 years for a human life? No matter what the verdict would have been, it wouldn’t have changed what happened and who was lost. It will never bring my child back.”