Acquittal in the polar bear trial: Richter sees too many contradictions

Acquittal for a 21-year-old man from the southern district of Ebersberg.

He was charged with rape and sexual assault and stood before the local court.

Ebersberg

- What exactly happened two years ago in front of the town hall in Grafing could not be clarified, said judge Markus Nikol in his judgment.

It stands testimony against testimony.

There were no other witnesses to the crime.

According to the judge, contradictions could not have been lifted and remained.

This also meant statements by the alleged victim, a 15-year-old girl at the time.

The young person had testified in court - in camera.

A video of an interrogation in the courtroom had previously been played.

Photo of the victim does not appear

The girl was at a carnival ball in Grafing with her parents and older sister.

The then 15-year-old is said to have gone outside with the defendant to smoke.

The defendant is said to have harassed them.

According to the indictment, there should have been sexual acts.

And there was also talk of a photo of the girl's bare breasts, taken by the defendant.

However, this photo did not appear.

Finally, there is said to have been a second meeting outside the town hall, at which the rape is said to have occurred.

The process spanned three days of negotiations.

A polar bear costume that the young man wore that night played an important role.

The defendant had put this on and off again during the trial.

It became clear that the zipper only went to the navel and not to the thighs.

In addition, the costume did not show any soiling.

The young man's defense attorney pointed out the polar bear costume and spoke of contradicting accounts of the girl, which he listed in detail.

The assumed timing does not fit either.

The defendant was severely drunk

The young man who comes from an intact environment.

had already been heavily drunk when he arrived in the town hall.

That increased in the course of the evening.

The defendant himself had asserted this and emphasized: "I cannot imagine committing such an act."

The prosecutor also spoke of “testimony against testimony”, but emphasized that she did not consider the girl to be untrustworthy.

The co-prosecutor pointed out that the girl's testimony had remained constant.

She is believable.