Getting married is a bit like playing the lottery. The tickets in this game come at different prices. Some people get lucky, some walk away empty-handed. And some sit down, as it were, to a round of Russian roulette, where the bullet sometimes hits someone other than the player. But whatever the price of the risk, disappointment is measured by the gap between expectation and reality. Often, a long courtship gives no hint of the failure to come. Rational psychopaths are capable of extraordinary self-control, right up to the moment the relationship is formally sealed before the appropriately solemn authority: you have to please until you have been “bought”; after that you can relax, because the victim now legally belongs to you.
Family life is constantly surrounded by a myth that glorifies this form of human coexistence: the joy of being together, radiantly healthy offspring and a happy old age surrounded by grandchildren. But that is like saying: “Buy a whole stack of lottery tickets and you’ll win a water tower.” Family means constant inner work searching for compromises, trying to preserve yourself as a person within a lasting community, one person’s problems and difficulties becoming shared ones that mostly hold back rather than encourage the development of each family member — and, on top of that, violence, emotional or physical, carefully hidden from the outside world, because nothing must tarnish that radiant picture of the family. The value of the family lies precisely in being, for children, a school of behavior and survival in society — ideally also a refuge from society at large. But when happiness fails to materialize, the reverse escape — from this small cell of society into the wide world — can become an enormous problem. And attempts to put things right by starting a new relationship often end in the same disappointment. It is a great subject for writers and psychologists. In searching for another person, we often search for ourselves, for our own childhood fears. Oh, how wonderful it would be if every problem could be solved on the psychoanalyst’s couch. But then the union of playwrights and screenwriters would protest. And as long as this status quo persists, the police, prosecutors and courts will be drawn into the orbit of family misfortune. So lawyers, too, will not be short of work.
Not a Hollywood Story
Arthur is a young man of barely forty, an engineer. Work, home, drawings, calculations. Everything about his professional abilities suggested that Arthur was a successful person. At some point he wanted a family, to fulfill himself both socially and biologically. Arthur proposed to a colleague. But he had miscalculated. The usual formulas for calculating load and efficiency do not work for the human psyche — it runs on a special kind of mathematics, made up of unknowns and mathematical signs that change their meaning in the middle of the calculation. All the machines Arthur helped design ran quietly and gratefully. His wife, on the other hand, was constantly dissatisfied with everything. And how to bring those two numbers to a common denominator remained a mystery. After three years of marriage, the couple separated.
Soon the first shock of marriage was forgotten, and Arthur decided to try again. Someone had told him that Russian women were different — all sweet, tender, gentle and wonderful. Arthur had been to Russia before; as a teenager he had himself come to Germany with his parents from a city in southern Russia. The whole family joined in the search for a bride. And a suitable candidate was found: a curly-haired beauty with a university degree, thirty-five years old, no children, always reserved and well groomed. The very dream of a raznochinets — in pre-revolutionary Russia there was such a class of educated people of non-noble origin. Arthur liked the young lady. She had nothing against it either. They visited each other and exchanged letters. So why wait any longer… To the delight of everyone involved in the operation “Marry Off Arthur”, the young couple’s wedding took place in Russia. Next came the question of family reunification in Germany (Familiennachzug). Anyone who has gone through this procedure knows how complicated the decision is. Fortunately, Arthur’s income was enough to support his wife, but even under favorable conditions the matter dragged on for several months. And then, at last, Svetlana was in Berlin. The Berlin Cathedral, the TV Tower, Art Nouveau. And an orderly life, planned well in advance.
Svetlana was content. Two long trips a year, excursions around Germany every month. At first Svetlana did not want children. She wanted to enjoy her freedom a little, learn the language, somehow get her degree recognized — and only then… Arthur agreed to this plan. But several years later Svetlana had neither had her degree recognized nor enjoyed life. Arthur felt like a cash cow whose purpose in life was to provide for an idler while being reproached for ruining that idler’s life by doing everything wrong. Those who do nothing themselves usually know exactly what should be done and how. The neighbors began to look Arthur in the eye more and more searchingly when they met him on the stairs. Women’s screams and the sound of breaking dishes regularly came from their apartment. Deep down Arthur knew he ought to end it — but so many relatives were convinced that, thanks to their efforts, he was happily married. How could he disappoint them?
A Hellish Problem
One weekend Arthur’s sister and his cousin came to visit Arthur and Svetlana. The two relatives live in another city. Art Nouveau no longer thrilled Svetlana, and Arthur’s sister had already seen everything in Berlin. The only new things left were parties and the latest clothing and shoe collections in the fashion stores. The young women decided to go shopping. They came back in the evening, flushed from the hunt for new clothes and, of course, exhausted. Arthur’s cousin had to hurry to catch her train home, and she made it. His sister stayed in Berlin for a few more days and was about to see something more striking than the new clothing collections.
The door closed behind the cousin. The smiles vanished. Svetlana nervously started unpacking her purchases. And, oh horror! The blouse she had bought for herself was not in the bag. Evidently her blouse was now swinging gently in the shopping bag hanging from the arm of one of their house guests. Svetlana flew into a rage and began cursing everyone and everything, hurling insults at all and sundry, from Arthur to his most distant relatives. Arthur tried to get a word in, saying that his wife was not behaving as she should. Then something happened that had never happened before. Svetlana often threw tantrums and sometimes threw dishes or chairs. But this time all her aggression was aimed at Arthur himself.
Svetlana kicked Arthur in the leg and, with a blood-curdling scream, dug her nails into his face. In shock, Arthur stepped back, but tripped and fell on his back. Svetlana jumped on him and started pounding his face with her fists. Had this been a no-rules fight, Svetlana would have been close to winning. But this was about life and limb. Arthur managed to grab his wife’s hands and push her away. Now it was Svetlana’s turn to fall. As she stepped back, she trod on a curtain, lost her footing and sat down on the floor. The curtain rod fell on her head. After helping his wife up, sitting her on the sofa and holding her hands, Arthur told Svetlana he was going to his mother’s. He hoped Svetlana would calm down soon and that they could get divorced. He took the bare essentials and left together with his sister.
Hello, My Dear!
Arthur was welcomed warmly at his parents’ home. But the joy quickly turned to surprise and then to horror. Arthur’s face was covered in bruises and scrapes. Arthur quickly explained what had happened. His parents urged him to go to the hospital, get examined and obtain a medical report in case of any fractures. Arthur waved it off — it would pass. But his father insisted and went with his son to the hospital. As it later turned out, with good reason. Experience and emotional distance evidently help one see a situation more soberly.
The next day Arthur and his father drove to Arthur and Svetlana’s apartment to discuss the situation and a plan for ending the marriage. But the conversation never happened. Svetlana started another fight, and Arthur was again struck in the face. Arthur called the police. The officers who arrived separated the spouses into different rooms and questioned each of them separately. They suggested filing complaints. Both filed complaints. Arthur told the police he would be living with his parents from now on. And the spouses separated.
Fortunately, the blows caused no fractures. But the doctor signed Arthur off sick for four days (Krankschreibung). During that time Arthur met with a divorce lawyer. Soon, however, he received a letter that forced him to look for a criminal defense lawyer (Strafverteidiger) instead. On his friends’ recommendation, Arthur turned to our firm. A few days after the incident involving the police, he had been notified that the proceedings based on his complaint had been discontinued for lack of a criminal offense, while criminal proceedings had been opened against him on the basis of his wife’s complaint. Arthur was accused of violating several provisions of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB): §§ 223, 224 — dangerous bodily harm (gefährliche Körperverletzung); § 241 — threatening the commission of a crime (Bedrohung).
In fairness, it should be said that the idea of seeking professional legal help did not occur to the engineer right away. Convinced of his innocence and knowing he had a witness to the conflict, Arthur could not understand how he could be the guilty party — and the only guilty party at that. Only the insistent advice of family and friends persuaded Arthur to consult a lawyer first, before making any statement.
The lawyer had to explain the actual state of affairs to him: despite his conviction that he was in the right, and despite his own statement and his sister’s, the public prosecutor’s office (Staatsanwaltschaft) had relied on his wife’s statement, dropped the allegations against her and brought charges against him. And the charges were more than serious. § 223 StGB provides for imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine; § 224 for imprisonment of 6 months to 10 years (in less serious cases 3 months to 5 years); § 241 for imprisonment of up to one year or a fine, and up to two years or a fine where the threat is to commit a serious crime (Verbrechen). So before making any statement, the evidence held by the prosecutor’s office first had to be analyzed — and for that, the investigation file had to be requested.
Amateurs Can Relax
With the client’s consent, the lawyer notified the public prosecutor’s office that he was representing the client and applied for access to the initial investigation file (Akteneinsicht). Once he had received the documents from the prosecutor’s office, it became clear to the lawyer that this would not be an easy case. Arthur’s wife had made a very skillful statement — so skillful that the police found it more credible than Arthur’s own. According to Svetlana, during the argument and in the presence of his sister, Arthur had attacked her, thrown her to the floor and started beating her as she lay there. Then, she claimed, he shouted to his sister: “Bring the knife from the kitchen, I’m going to kill this bitch!” After this threat, Arthur had allegedly begun to strangle her, but something had stopped him. He had then left the apartment with his sister. The file also contained photographs of bruises on Svetlana’s arms, legs and buttocks and of an injury to the back of her head.
The lawyer carefully examined the statements of those involved and the photographs in the file and set out the legally relevant facts side by side. He then prepared and filed an application with the public prosecutor’s office to discontinue the criminal proceedings against his client under § 170 Abs. 2 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) — because the accused’s guilt could not be proven (no criminal offense in his conduct). In support, the lawyer cited the facts known to him and those he had established when reviewing the investigation file.
The lawyer pointed out that the injured party claimed our client had hit her in the face, tried to strangle her and asked his sister to bring him a knife to kill her. However, these allegations were not supported by any evidence. There had frequently been quarrels between the injured party and the accused, started by the injured party (as numerous witnesses among her friends and family could confirm). On that day, too, the injured party had started the quarrel — she had struck our client in the face and scratched him with her nails, as confirmed by photographs, the medical report and the witness statement. The injuries to our client’s face were so significant that he had to take sick leave and could not work for 4 days.
When our client tried to hold the injured party by the arms, she wrenched herself free and tried to hit him in the face again. She then bit him, and in self-defense he pushed her away. She stepped on a curtain, slipped and began to fall. Our client tried to catch her but failed — the injured party fell, hit her head, and the curtain rod fell on her.
These events explain the bruises on the injured party’s body and are also confirmed by the witness statement. The lawyer stressed that clear traces of injuries inflicted by the injured party were visible on his client’s face — significant and pronounced. As for the injured party herself, any threat to her life by our client had not been proven: there were no signs of strangulation on her neck, no bruises or hematomas. These statements were untrue; the injured party had made them to divert the police’s attention from herself and from the injuries she had inflicted on our client. She had documented the bruises on her face and buttocks very carefully and photographed them with her mobile phone. Yet she had not photographed the hematomas that should have remained on her neck — where, as is well known, the skin is more sensitive and delicate. It followed that there had been none.
As for the threat to her life, the injured party had shown no fear of our client, either then or now — which would have been entirely expected had he really threatened to kill her. Our client had left the apartment of his own accord and gone to his parents. Over the following two days there were several phone calls between the two, in which our client suggested that the injured party move into a hotel at his expense. His wife, however, did not want to live separately. The lawyer noted that he was aware of further incidents of aggressive behavior by the injured party towards his client, which he could present if necessary and which would raise further serious doubts about the credibility of her statements.
There had been a quarrel between the spouses, provoked by the injured party. Both sides had caused each other bodily harm, with the injured party demonstrably attacking our client first, as confirmed by the witness statement. Our client’s actions therefore had to be classified as self-defense — Notwehr — under § 32 StGB.
After reviewing the lawyer’s application and its reasoning, the public prosecutor’s office granted it and discontinued the proceedings under § 170 Abs. 2 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure for lack of a criminal offense. How the relationship between our client and his (for now) wife will develop, we do not know — but we are glad that, thanks to the professionalism of our firm’s lawyer, blind rage did not end up wrecking a person’s life.
All rights reserved. Copying or republishing this article requires a link to the original source.
