The reporting in the Göttinger Tageblatt about the attempt to take a DNA sample, a forensic examination and an interrogation of the 23-year-old man from Göttingen who was seriously injured with a knife on the night of June 20th to 21st requires clarification:
On June 23rd, the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office was informed that the parents of the injured party had retained the law firm of Sven Adam to represent their legal interests. It was emphasized that the injured party's state of health must be respected and that any questioning should only take place once the injured party is fit to be questioned, and, most importantly, only in the presence of their lawyer. Furthermore, it was suggested that any planned investigative measures against our client be coordinated with us in advance. The Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates the specific procedural rights, in particular the right to consult legal counsel before and during questioning (§ 68b, § 163 para. 3 StPO), as well as – should the injured party be considered a suspect – the right to consult a lawyer at any time, even before questioning (§ 136 para. 1, § 137 StPO).
Instead of respecting these rights, four police officers appeared unannounced in our client's hospital room in the early afternoon of June 25th and demanded that he consent to a voluntary DNA sample being taken and a forensic examination. They also wanted to conduct an interrogation. At that point, the injured party refused these police measures—due to his state of health—and asked the officers to leave the hospital room. It is unclear whether he was even aware of exactly what was being demanded of him and why—especially since valid consent to a molecular genetic examination requires the capacity to consent (§ 81f of the German Code of Criminal Procedure).
Subsequently, we were informed of this incident by the injured party's parents and contacted the Göttingen police station. They informed us that the only point of contact for investigative measures was the Göttingen public prosecutor's office – the authority responsible for the investigation, which we contacted on June 23rd.
The claim that the police actions were coordinated with a doctor still needs to be verified. According to our information, the doctors at the University Medical Center Göttingen (UMG) instead asked the investigating authorities, due to the injured person's health condition, not to question him before the beginning of next week. The parents have been informed of this.
The claim that the police were unaware of our firm's written submission two days after its electronic transmission also raises questions. This is because the police personally delivered summonses to the firm's mailbox in the early afternoon of June 25th. The representation of the witnesses is evident solely from the aforementioned written submission of June 23rd, the contents of which the police claimed to be unaware of.
The health of our client must be the primary concern. This is not about slowing down or obstructing the investigation. Nor is it about dictating the timing of investigative measures, as the Göttingen public prosecutor's office suggests in its press coverage in the Göttinger Tageblatt. It is about respecting the procedural rights of the 23-year-old and questioning him only when he is well enough to do so. As correctly reported in national media, our client suffered life-threatening injuries. He was in a medically induced coma for several days.
The public prosecutor's office has not ruled out the possibility that the 17-year-old suspect acted in self-defense and has not applied for an arrest warrant against him. The Göttingen public prosecutor's office is therefore considering the possibility that the victim committed a prior criminal attack. Precisely because he faces an accusation of a crime, he is entitled to the rights of a suspect – in particular, the right to consult a lawyer before any questioning (§ 136 para. 1, § 137 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure) and the right to legal counsel during questioning (§ 68b of the German Code of Criminal Procedure).
We have not yet been able to have such a conversation about the incident itself – due to his state of health.
We assume that the rights of our seriously injured client will be protected from now on.
For further questions, please contact attorney Sven Adam using the contact details provided.
