Public Prosecutor Augsburg

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Augsburg Public Prosecutor's Office is a law enforcement and enforcement authority of the Free State of Bavaria . The public prosecutor's office is based in Augsburg in the criminal justice center at Gögginger Str. 101. It is one of 22 public prosecutor's offices and the third largest in Bavaria.

Jurisdiction

The Augsburg public prosecutor is responsible for processing all criminal cases in the Augsburg regional court district. In addition to the city of Augsburg, this includes the districts of Aichach-Friedberg , Augsburg , Dillingen an der Donau , Landsberg am Lech and Donau-Ries . The public prosecutor's office is also responsible for the execution of sentences after the final conclusion of criminal proceedings. This also includes the processing of mercy cases.

The superior authority is the Munich Public Prosecutor's Office .

organization

The public prosecutor's office has 185 employees (as of 2013), including

Nimbus of particular severity

The Augsburg Public Prosecutor's Office has a reputation in legal circles for prosecuting criminal offenses in general particularly strictly and consistently. That public prosecutor usually demands that the court impose a particularly high sentence on the accused.

Public criticism of the way of working

The public prosecutor's office in Augsburg is exposed to particular public criticism. She was involved in several spectacular cases, which often gave the population the impression that the agency was not working objectively. A number of dubious events occurred. The Augsburg Public Prosecutor's Office is accused of allowing itself to be influenced by the interests of political parties , especially the CSU , and consequently being particularly eager in some cases (e.g. against critics), but not investigating at all in others (or wrongful proceedings set), depending on the political network of the person concerned. This supposed nepotism (or clique / amigo economy ) would be a violation of the principle of equality in Article 3 of the Basic Law . The following cases are particularly well known:

  • 1996: During investigations against Max Strauss , the son of the former Bavarian Prime Minister Franz Josef Strauss , for tax evasion in the millions, Max Strauss had been warned against the search of his Munich apartment. According to the company's own account, a hard drive that was secured during the search had been infected by a computer virus and deleted immediately beforehand . When the public prosecutor's office in Augsburg later wanted to have it examined further, it was allegedly no longer traceable, as were the data backup tapes that were also confiscated. The opposition parties in the Bavarian state parliament spoke openly of the fact that evidence was evidently deliberately removed here.
  • 2000: CDU party donation scandal / CDU donation affair , proceedings against Walther Leisler Kiep , Karlheinz Schreiber and Jürgen Maßmann. It was alleged that the prosecutor's investigations were being obstructed. In addition, the public prosecutor's office had kept a secret file on the matter. The extremely committed investigative public prosecutor Winfried Maier was suddenly withdrawn from the case and then, under massive pressure, switched from public prosecutor to judge work. The Augsburg Chief Public Prosecutor Jörg Hillinger , who was also very involved in the investigation, had a fatal car accident during the investigation in 1999 , which led to suspicions that he might have been murdered as a result of an accident. A few weeks earlier, Hillinger had accused the head of the Bavarian Ministry of Justice, Wolfgang Held (CSU), of having passed on the results of the investigation to the Bavarian state government. In addition, in the weeks before his death, he had stated that he had repeatedly been hindered by the Munich Public Prosecutor Hermann Froschauer (CSU) in his investigations by incomprehensible instructions.
  • 2006: The Augsburg public prosecutor is involved in the Schottdorf affair . The former Augsburg public prosecutor Uwe Huchel, who was later convicted of corruption and money laundering , had stopped criminal proceedings against the laboratory doctor Bernhard Schottdorf before 2006 . The resumed proceedings were withdrawn from the responsible Munich corruption prosecutor after more than two years of investigative work due to alleged lack of jurisdiction and transferred to the Augsburg public prosecutor . The proceedings against Schottdorf were then immediately discontinued. Bernhard Schottdorf was represented by the lawyers Peter Gauweiler and Hermann Leeb ; both are former Bavarian CSU ministers .
  • 2008: The forwarding agent Uwe N. reported police officers for abuse . What is certain is that after an emergency call was received on July 19, 2008, the police mistakenly drove to the wrong address, namely that of Uwe N. The latter claims that he was then beaten and tortured by the police for no reason. At the time he had had a fresh shoulder operation and screamed loudly in pain during the operation. The case against the police officers was dropped. On the other hand, the public prosecutor's office in Augsburg then charged Uwe N. with alleged false suspicion . The fact that he was then acquitted in the first instance did not prevent the public prosecutor's office from proceeding against him. But in the court of appeal was Uwe N. acquitted again.
  • 2009: The Augsburg public prosecutor applied for a search warrant because a citizen illegally downloaded two MP3 files on the Internet, each worth 1.29 euros. The reasoning states " The public prosecutor's office affirms a special public interest in criminal prosecution " and " The seizure is proportionate to the gravity of the offense and the strength of the suspicion and is necessary for the investigation ".
  • 2009: The former Augsburg public prosecutor Uwe Huchel had the fine of an investment fraudster paid into a foundation that was registered in his mother's name. In addition, the laboratory entrepreneur Bernd Schottdorf Huchel had loaned money. Schottdorf was therefore suspected of paying bribes to the public prosecutor. As a public prosecutor, Huchel had also processed the anonymous reports against Schottdorf (cf. Schottdorf affair ), but no bribery could be proven. It remained only with the charge of granting an advantage . Schottdorf accepted a penalty order of 90 daily rates of 5,000 euros each, hence a fine of 450,000 euros. The resulting proceedings against the public prosecutor Uwe Huchel were terminated under curious circumstances. In a trial that was scheduled at short notice and had not been publicly announced, the Munich District Court I sentenced him to three years and three months in prison for money laundering, fraud and the acceptance of benefits. The accusation of perversion of the law, however, was dropped by the public prosecutor, according to the statement of the investigating LKA official on the instructions of the Bavarian Minister of Justice Beate Merk and the Munich Public Prosecutor's Office . Uwe Huchel was removed from service as a public prosecutor.
  • 2010: A public prosecutor from the Augsburg public prosecutor's office wrote literally in an indictment the sentence " A public defender is to be appointed to the accused asshole".
  • 2013: Because the CSU politician and regulatory officer for the city of Augsburg, Volker Ullrich , felt insulted by a user of the online opinion forum of the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung, he asked the newspaper editors to provide the real name or the connection data ( IP address ) of the user. The relevant statement in the forum read: This Ullrich even forbids adult men to have their after-work beer from 8 p.m. by violating applicable law and severely threatening operators . The forum user had criticized the fact that Ullrich had taken action against the sale of alcohol at gas stations after 8 p.m. When the newspaper refused to publish the data, Ullrich presumably let go of his connections with the Augsburg public prosecutor . For these applied for a search warrant for the offices of the newspaper provided by investigating judge at the district court Augsburg was adopted. The action was criticized , among other things, by the Bavarian Association of Journalists as being completely excessive. The freedom of the press and the basic right to freedom of expression had been undermined by a CSU politician with the help of his good relations. In addition, the forum statement in question had no criminal content at all, as it was clearly an expression of opinion. In retrospect, following a complaint from the newspaper, the Augsburg Regional Court declared the search warrant to be unlawful. The regional court criticized the fact that the search warrant lacks the legal basis, because the statement by the user, by which the clerk felt offended, was clearly not to be considered punishable when viewed as a whole.
Max Liebermann : Woman with child from behind , published by the Augsburg public prosecutor
  • 2013: The Augsburg public prosecutor decided not to initiate an investigation against the specialist in forensic psychiatry Klaus Leipziger and the district judge Armin Eberl . The lawyer Gerhard Strate , who represents the miscarriage of justice victim Gustl Mollath , filed a criminal complaint against Leipzig and district judge Eberl in January 2013 on suspicion of serious deprivation of liberty . This decision (“no preliminary investigation”) was very much criticized in the legal world.
  • 2014: The RTL reporter Wolfram Kuhnigk had filmed with a hidden camera how parents from the fundamental Christian sect Twelve Tribes hit their children in a darkened room with rods and canes on the buttocks . He made these recordings available to the authorities. As a result, all parents were temporarily withdrawn from custody . The children were given to foster parents and children's homes. On the other hand, the Augsburg public prosecutor's office initiated an investigation against the investigative journalist Wolfram Kuhnigk for breach of the confidentiality of the word . The proceedings were later dropped.
  • 2014: The Augsburg public prosecutor's office was accused that hundreds of fraudulent doctors remained unpunished because the public prosecutor's office allowed the proceedings to become statute-barred due to inaction , even though one of the accused doctors had been convicted of fraud in a pilot trial. It was about the accounting practice in connection with the Augsburg Schottdorf laboratory ( Schottdorf affair ). The investigating officers of the State Criminal Police Office are said to have been deliberately slowed down. They are said to have been forbidden to obtain any further search warrants. Ultimately, an investigation was even carried out against the chief detective commissioners concerned for allegedly persecuting innocent people . The case resulted in the establishment of a committee of inquiry in the Bavarian state parliament. The “Laboratory Investigative Committee” heard numerous witnesses on a total of 41 meeting days, but could not find any evidence of political influence on the proceedings.
  • 2017: The Augsburg public prosecutor identified and requested search warrants based on an anonymous, date-free letter. However, the responsible investigating judge rejected this. The complaint of the public prosecutor's office before the regional court Augsburg was rejected due to the meaningless information and the lack of objective knowledge.

Other prominent cases

Head of the Augsburg Public Prosecutor's Office ( Chief Public Prosecutor )

  • until 1994: Wilma Resenscheck
  • 1994–1999: Jörg Hillinger
  • 1999–2014: Reinhard Nemetz
  • since 2015: Rolf Werlitz

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Schottdorf's opponents position themselves. ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from May 30, 2014
  2. ↑ a b c Policeman criticizes attorney general. ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung online from March 9, 2015
  3. ^ The Asshole Affair 2.0 of the Augsburg justice system.
  4. ↑ The CSU cannot get rid of some of the contaminated sites. ; in: Schwäbische Zeitung of October 27, 2011
  5. ↑ data disappeared: embarrassing glitch during investigations against Strauss-Sohn ; in: Spiegel Online from April 12, 2000
  6. ↑ Contradictions about Max Strauss's hard drive. ; in: Berliner Zeitung of April 22, 2000
  7. ↑ Winfried Maier - Bavarian public prosecutor who fled to the judiciary ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung of May 17, 2001
  8. ↑ a b Bankruptcy of the judiciary. ; in: Der Spiegel, issue 19/2000 from May 8, 2000
  9. ^ "Schottdorf case" in TV and university ; in: Bürgerblick Passau from November 19, 2013
  10. ↑ a b Ex-public prosecutor as money launderer ; in: Merkur Online from May 24, 2009
  11. ^ Answer of the State Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection of July 14, 2011 to the written question of the Member of Parliament Florian Streibl ; in: Bavarian State Parliament, 16th electoral period, printed matter No. 16/8832, page 3/4, from April 21, 2011
  12. ↑ Answer of the State Ministry of Justice and for Consumer Protection of February 24, 2010 to the written question of the MPs Susanna Tausendfreund, Christine Kamm, Theresa Schopper BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN ; in: Bavarian State Parliament, 16th electoral period, printed matter No. 16/4001, page 3/4, from February 24, 2010
  13. ^ Wilhelm Schlötterer : Delusion and arbitrariness. Strauss and his heirs or how to put a country in your pocket , Munich 2013, p. 234 ff.
  14. ↑ A police operation with consequences ; in: Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung of November 16, 2012
  15. ↑ Bavaria: three house searches because of a work ( memento from July 9, 2013 in the web archive archive.today )
  16. ↑ Augsburg Doctors' War ; in: Der Spiegel, issue 6/2009 from February 2, 2009
  17. ^ Laboratory Doctor Affair - News in the Schottdorf case ; in: Bayerisches Fernsehen from December 8, 2014.
  18. ^ Prosecutor calls the defendant an asshole ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from May 11, 2010
  19. ↑ When the judge knows nothing more ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from March 23, 2011
  20. ↑ Failure not intentionally committed. in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from April 1, 2011
  21. ↑ Blogging can be dangerous - the Augsburg Public Prosecutor's Office is initiating proceedings because of a blog post
  22. ↑ Journalists' associations criticize the seizure. ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from January 29, 2013
  23. ↑ Confiscation by the Augsburger Allgemeine: the search order was unlawful ; in: Spiegel Online from March 20, 2013
  24. ↑ Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger on the Gurlitt case - being righteous does not help here ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung of November 17, 2013
  25. ↑ Münchner Kunstfund: Where is the rule of law? ; in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of November 17, 2013
  26. ↑ man for explosive cases ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung from November 19, 2013
  27. ↑ Breakdown series: Too many questions remain unanswered ( Memento from November 16, 2013 in the Internet Archive ); in: B5 from November 20, 2013
  28. ^ Case Mollath: Public Prosecutor Augsburg '- Si tacuisses!
  29. ^ Public prosecutor's office is investigating TV reporters. ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from January 31, 2014
  30. ↑ Two against the Free State ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from May 16, 2014
  31. ↑ Doctors fraud proceedings: State Parliament is considering a Soko Justice ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from May 18, 2014
  32. ^ Laboratory investigative committee | Bavarian State Parliament. Retrieved January 3, 2019 .
  33. ↑ Many questions in the Schottdorf affair. Retrieved January 3, 2019 .
  34. ^ LG Augsburg, judgment of September 12, 2017, Az. 1 Qs 339/17
  35. ↑ 18 years after the crime: Natalie's murderer wants to be free. ; in: Augsburger Allgemeine from March 6, 2014
  36. ^ Preventive detention in the Vanessa murder case. ; in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung from November 15, 2012
  37. ^ The Schüttelschorsch file ; in: Süddeutsche Zeitung Online from November 12, 2014
  38. ^ Rolf Werlitz new chief of the public prosecutor's office. ( Memento from April 2, 2015 in the Internet Archive ); in: Bayerisches Fernsehen from January 15, 2015