VERDICT
In the criminal case
against
xxx,
Defense counsel:
Attorney Sven Adam, Lange Geismarstraße 55, 37073 Göttingen
for resisting law enforcement officers
The Braunschweig District Court — Criminal Judge — ruled in its session of May 16, 2017, which was attended by:
Judge at the District Court xxx
as criminal judge
Senior Public Prosecutor xxx
as an official of the Public Prosecutor's Office
Lawyer Sven Adam
as defense counsel
Court clerk xxx
as certifying officer of the registry
recognized as rightful:
The defendant is acquitted at the expense of the state treasury, which also bears the defendant's necessary expenses.
Applicable provision: Section 113 of the German Criminal Code
REASONS
(abbreviated in accordance with Section 267 Paragraph 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO))
The defendant is accused in the penal order issued by the Braunschweig District Court on September 2, 2016, of having violently resisted an official, who is called upon to enforce laws, in Braunschweig on February 29, 2016, while he was carrying out such an official act.
He was charged with the following:
Around 8:30 p.m., during a BRAGIDA rally in the Münzstraße/Domplatz area, left-wing counter-demonstrators committed a breach of the peace and attempted assault against police officers. They recorded the incident with their digital camera. From the perspective of the police officers on the scene, it was assumed that the recordings they had made documented the crimes committed earlier by unknown perpetrators and that some of the perpetrators could be identified using the recordings. On the orders of the commanding officer, Police Officer xxx informed them that the recordings could be considered evidence and offered to review them together on site to determine their potential relevance. After they refused, Police Officer xxx informed them that the camera and storage media were being confiscated, as these were needed as evidence. To prevent the confiscation of the camera and storage media, they initially moved backward and waved their arms in front of the officer's face. In order to seize the camera, police officer xxx then grabbed her arm. Using physical force, she tried to break free to prevent the camera from being confiscated. The police officer then put her in a head hold, against which she resisted using physical force. Nevertheless, she was unable to prevent the police from confiscating the camera.
The crime could not be proven, so an acquittal was granted on factual grounds.
The decision on costs is based on Section 467 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
