3 ms·

I know that this is off-topic, but Gustl Mollath did not walk free because of some interference but because he was explicitly ruled not-guilty and was completel

I know that this is off-topic, but Gustl Mollath did not walk free because of some interference but because he was explicitly ruled not-guilty and was completely rehabilitated by a court. The case then went up to the highest court which confirmed the ruling. He is not a felon in any meaning of that word.

Tomte 11y ago
You're misinformed, but that's common. To the contrary: the court convicted him, but for procedural reasons he walked free. The lower court's acquittal was appealed (revision) by the defense and the prosecution. Since the prosecution had appealed the sentence could have been more severe (more than "nothing"). The justice minister then ordered the prosecution to withdraw its appeal. That means that the sentence could not be more severe. The higher court subsequently convicted and sentenced to "nothing", because of this procedural rule. As an aside: he is a violent felon. He has been legally bindingly convicted of having thrown his wife out of a car while driving. He has been convicted of domestic violence. As the prosecutor said in his plea: his claim that the well-documented bite marks on her neck were a result of falling out of the car is outlandish.
- germanier 11y ago
  I did follow the case and I refuse to be called misinformed. The Landgericht Regensburg discharged him on factual, not procedural, grounds with the verdict from 14.08.2014. Only in the case from 12.8.2001 (the one with bite marks) did they discharge him on legal grounds as they ruled that he didn't fulfill the obligations of § 20 StGB (i.e. he was not convicted because he was might have been insane – which still means not guilty and not a felon, that's how the justice system works). Could you please cite which legally binding convictions there still are against him? As far as I know they all have been part of the above renewal case and a short search in a legal database seems to confirm that. I also have never heard of an order to withdraw an appeal nor can I find anything. She did order to renew the case, yes, but that is not the same.

Tomte 11y ago

You're misinformed, but that's common. To the contrary: the court convicted him, but for procedural reasons he walked free. The lower court's acquittal was appealed (revision) by the defense and the prosecution. Since the prosecution had appealed the sentence could have been more severe (more than "nothing"). The justice minister then ordered the prosecution to withdraw its appeal. That means that the sentence could not be more severe. The higher court subsequently convicted and sentenced to "nothing", because of this procedural rule. As an aside: he is a violent felon. He has been legally bindingly convicted of having thrown his wife out of a car while driving. He has been convicted of domestic violence. As the prosecutor said in his plea: his claim that the well-documented bite marks on her neck were a result of falling out of the car is outlandish.

germanier 11y ago
I did follow the case and I refuse to be called misinformed. The Landgericht Regensburg discharged him on factual, not procedural, grounds with the verdict from 14.08.2014. Only in the case from 12.8.2001 (the one with bite marks) did they discharge him on legal grounds as they ruled that he didn't fulfill the obligations of § 20 StGB (i.e. he was not convicted because he was might have been insane – which still means not guilty and not a felon, that's how the justice system works). Could you please cite which legally binding convictions there still are against him? As far as I know they all have been part of the above renewal case and a short search in a legal database seems to confirm that. I also have never heard of an order to withdraw an appeal nor can I find anything. She did order to renew the case, yes, but that is not the same.