The last word is Detlef Hardt. The former head of the White Ring Lübeck speaks on Monday in Lübeck district court. According to his defense counsel, the defendant has only one thing to say to the court: "I did not commit the crime."
Hardt has since June because of the charge of exhibitionism 'in court answer. Dora M. accuses the now 74-year-old, in April 2016, in an advisory situation baring his penis, playing around with him and asking her to touch him. The 41-year-old woman had then turned to the White Ring for help. There are more than two dozen other women who independently accuse the former Lübeck head of the Victim Support Organization of sexual assault. Only the allegation of Dora M. was admitted to the trial.
Behind closed doors
The public prosecutor's office is requesting Hardt to be sentenced to three months' imprisonment for exhibitionism in the afternoon. The prison sentence was suspended for two years on probation. The lawyer of Dora M., Robert Nieporte, joins the motion. Defender Oliver Dedow applies for acquittal for his client.
The pleadings, like Hardt's last word, are behind closed doors. Since the main proceedings were partly held to the exclusion of the public in order to protect the co-plaintiff, the law stipulates that even without public opinion.
The public prosecutor's office considers the data of the co-plaintiff plausible. For more than three and a half years, Dora M. has shown a constant statement and no stress tendency, a spokeswoman for the public prosecutor's office summarizes the pleading of prosecutor Magdalena Salska afterwards outside the hall. The statements of Dora M. were also confirmed by the testimony of other women, the hardt should also have sexually molested.
"The tip of the eisberg"
"All the women, although they did not know each other, described the same sexually assaultive and distressing behavior patterns of the defendant." In this pattern fit the accused exhibitionist action "exactly" into it. "The act is just the tip of the iceberg." For years, the defendant in his distinguished position as head of the White Ring had behaved sexually overbearing. "The imposition of a short prison sentence is essential for the defense of the legal system," says the spokeswoman.
The testimony of the co-plaintiff is incredible, but substantiates Hardts defender Dedow outside the hall his required acquittal. He refers to a psychological report, according to which it can not be ruled out that Dora M. lied.
Sergeant Nieporte had filed a final request for evidence in the morning. He demanded another report. Not Dora M., but Detlef Hardt was to be assessed psychiatric.
"The accused is mentally ill," said Nieporte in the hall. A psychiatric assessor will find that the man had been sex addicted at the time of the alleged offense and is still suffering from the disease today. The expert will also find that "the defendant is today with his illness a threat to the general public and especially for women in their sexual self-determination".
"Wolf in sheep's clothing"
All allegations against Hardt should be considered in their entirety, said Nieporte. "There is much to suggest that the defendant did not control his behavior." The multiplicity of the alleged attacks and the always same kind of proceeding show an almost obsessive behavior.
Hardt, as an employee of the White Ring, "consciously and deliberately" has taken a position in which he has been able to exploit the helplessness of victims as a "wolf in sheep's clothing". He has "regularly abused and exploited the trust that the women brought to the White Ring." His unacceptable behavior was also aware of Hardt himself. "Alone: He could not let off because of his need for sexual gratification."
More background at SPIEGEL Plus
Usually such a request would come in other procedures from the defense. If an expert determined that a defendant could not control his behavior due to illness or could only control it to a limited extent, he should hope for a mitigation of the sentence. Detlef Hardt but wants no mitigation, he wants an acquittal. And that's because of another report.
Appraisals against reports?
Legal psychologist Gabriele Teichert does not have the accused, she has examined the co-plaintiff. And Teichert has doubts about the credibility of the statement by Dora M. The expert concludes that the allegations may be an exaggeration or "a certain misrepresentation". Defender Dedow refers to this report in the afternoon in his plea. The prosecution, however, found that Teichert's report was not convincing.
Nieporte is unsuccessful in his application for review of the accused.
The judge refuses him for insignificance. Even if the defendant is sex addicted, that does not prove that he committed the alleged act. "From an appraisal should be closed to another event," said Judge Andrea Schulz. "This conclusion is up to the court."
Judge Schulz will announce what conviction the court has come up with on Thursday. In the afternoon then the verdict should fall.
