Beaten prison inmates?

Judgment pronouncement at the district court of Regensburg against JVA officials

Created: 05/10/2022, 18:11

Lawyer Tim Fischer (r.) Sees no motive for the alleged violence in his client.

© Michael Bothner

The allegations against two security officers from the JVA Straubing weighed heavily.

But there is a history of the credibility of their supposed victim.

Regensburg – When judge Ursula Schimke-Kinskofer made her judgment at the end, one of the accused cried.

Acquittal - after massive allegations that would have meant the career of him and his colleagues and the loss of their pension.

But in the end, Schimke-Kinskofer does not believe the alleged victim to be credible.

Regensburg District Court: Disappeared radio causes excitement in the JVA Straubing

Two prison officers of the Straubing prison have been charged before the Regensburg district court.

It was June 19, 2019 at the correctional facility.

Some of the inmates were busy in the internal warehouse of a supplier company for Krones - a normal day.

But suddenly there was excitement.

One of the company employees had lost the radio for internal communication.

In case of doubt, highly sensitive conversations between officials could also be overheard.

The stolen device was only released for a limited area.

Nevertheless, the incident triggered a large-scale search operation.

Several inmates were questioned.

In front of the district court in Regensburg, an official responsible at the time described the events on the witness stand in the warehouse.

"I should keep my flock together." As security officials turned the facility upside down, he noticed that an inmate had disappeared.

In a side passage of the hall he saw the two accused - Quirin T. and his direct superior Karl O. (all names have been changed).

They were questioning an inmate about the radio - in a slightly uncharming way.

"They grabbed his tie and shook him a few times," the witness recalls.

Of course that is not allowed.

"But my," it wasn't that bad.

The case then plays no further role in court.

Karl O. made it clear to the warehouse clerk that he should go back to his "folk".

JVA-Straubing-Trial at the District Court of Regensburg: interrogation in the S-tract - nobody gets it

The next day prisoner Jan M. came to see the witness, who was also a certain confidante due to his position.

"I deal with them for several hours every day and of course the way they deal with things is completely different from security." It often happened that inmates complained to him.

M. was upset and angry.

He could hardly calm down.

Because M. was also questioned the day before by the two defendants about the missing radio.

They took him to the so-called S tract.

He is considered isolated.

The video cameras are usually switched off.

It was not unusual "to go to another area that is not directly adjacent to the cell," explained the head of the Straubing prison at the time on the witness stand.

"Otherwise people would start talking immediately if the other inmates heard about it." And that's not nice for the inmates either.

JVA Straubing process at the district court of Regensburg: grabbed by the neck and hit several times

Only the officials and the inmate Jan M., who appears in court as a joint plaintiff, know exactly what happened there that day.

If he were working in security, he would first search a prisoner for dangerous objects, says the department head at the time on the witness stand.

Just like his colleagues did on June 12, 2019.

At least there is no big doubt about that in court.

The extent to which M. really posed a high potential risk at the time remains unclear in court.

His lawyer already sees this approach as questionable.

Jan M. later reported to the officials from the work hall and a social worker that his actions had been completely exaggerated, even violent.

Accordingly, M. replied to the officials several times that he did not have the radio and did not know anything about it.

Quirin T. then quickly put on black gloves and grabbed his neck, pressed him down and hit him several times.

Meanwhile, Karl O. was standing in the door.

The supervisor did not actively intervene in what was happening, but had a calming effect on his colleague.

"I already know how to do it so that you don't notice anything," Quirin T. replied.

At least that's what Jan M tells. The two accused deny the allegations in court.

JVA Straubing trial at the district court of Regensburg: there is a lot at stake for the accused

There is a lot at stake for them.

While Karl O. retired shortly after the incident for health reasons, his colleague's career was about to end for the time being.

According to attorney Tim Fischer, this career has stalled because of the process.

If convicted, he could lose his salary.

The two men have many years of professional experience, according to lawyer Fischer.

There was also no motive for violent action.

In the end, district judge Ursula Schimke-Kinskofer found it difficult to really believe the alleged victim.

Not because he is less credible as a prisoner from the outset.

But Jan M. gave some reasons not to believe his statements.

JVA Straubing process at the district court of Regensburg: many reasons not to believe the inmates

It starts with the alleged injuries.

Nobody saw them.

There is no other evidence for it either.

Fellow inmates summoned as witnesses make contradictory statements.

In the course of an interrogation, for example, the pressure points from the neck move further and further towards the larynx.

The social worker says that Jan M. basically seemed authentic at the time.

But she didn't see any injuries either.

Jan M.'s testimony also raises questions.

The social worker had suggested a supervisory complaint at the time.

A complaint was later filed against the two officers.

But when the police wanted to question Jan M. several weeks after the incident, he refused.

It was not until December 2019 that he made extensive statements and heavily burdened the two men.

In early 2020, he again refused to testify.

JVA Straubing process at the district court of Regensburg: prisoner thinks about appeal

The fact that he was initially afraid of being disadvantaged because of his allegations does not seem credible to the judge.

It is also discussed in court that M. has repeatedly attracted attention in the past through complaints against judicial officials.

At one point he even turned to the

.

None of the alleged cases could subsequently be proven.

Attorney Fischer also asks himself why should Jan M. be afraid of repression now of all times.

Later, when the verdict was announced, he patted his client, who was in tears, on the shoulder.

Because the judge ultimately sees no evidence of the allegations being negotiated and acquits the accused completely.

The private prosecutor wants to at least keep the means of appeal open.