Two police officers have been acquitted by the district court of Rüsselsheim of the accusation of bodily injury in office. The reason for the trial was an altercation between patrol officers and a pharmacist in Kelsterbach in September 2021. The pharmacist had complained to them that one of his customer parking spaces had been used to check a motorist. One of the officers then demanded the pharmacist's ID, which he did not carry with him. After a verbal argument, a scuffle finally ensued, in the course of which one of the two police officers, the older of the two defendants, struck twice with a telescopic metal baton. According to District Judge Andrea Besold, this procedure was not punishable. The decision is not yet final.

Jan Schiefenhövel

Editor in the Rhein-Main-Zeitung.

  • Follow I follow

The verdict was very close. The actions of the 33-year-old officer were "just" justifiable and were within the scope of decision-making that the law gives to a police officer on duty, the judge said in her verdict. The public prosecutor's office had demanded a fine of 90 daily rates for the defendant, which amounts to an amount of 5400 euros in his income. For the second, 24-year-old defendant, the public prosecutor's office had demanded acquittal because he had only wanted to help his colleague in the confusing situation of the scuffle.

The lawyer of the pharmacist, who participated in the trial as a joint plaintiff, demanded that both defendants be punished for assault in office. The offence had been committed jointly because the younger officer had detained the pharmacist while the older had struck. Joint plaintiffs and the public prosecutor's office are considering appealing, so that the case may be heard again before the Darmstadt Regional Court.

Videos show blows with batons

In the courtroom, several videos of what happened had been evaluated, including the recording of the younger defendant's bodycam and videos made by witnesses with their mobile phones. In the film sequences, the elderly officer can be seen reaching out with the baton up to his head and hitting. The policeman had not denied this in the trial, but spoke of the blows to the leg being "dosed" and not carried out with full force.

The pharmacist had disturbed the control of a motorist who had driven without a belt, said the judge. Therefore, it was justified that the elderly policeman wanted to determine his personal details. The account of the two officials could not be refuted with certainty.

Words of warning from the judge

The controlled motorist had testified contradictorily as a witness. Details of his depiction could not be reconciled with reality. The man, like several other witnesses, had testified in court that the pharmacist had complained to the officers in a calm tone because a customer parking lot had been blocked by the control. The older of the police officers then became loud and aggressive. A witness had testified that during the beating, the policeman was "like in a tunnel". The judge said the witnesses had been influenced by media coverage in the period between the incident and the trial, so their account was not reliable.

The district judge explained that a police officer had only a few seconds to decide on a course of action. The court did not have to decide whether the actions of the police officers in this case had been "clever and wise".

Addressing the officials, Besold said it would be good if, inspired by the court hearing, they thought "whether this is how it can be done." Turning to the pharmacist, the judge said that it was understandable that he had not been able to get over the treatment by the two policemen for a long time and had suffered mentally.