Our Protagonist
Mr. Herbert Claussen is an elderly gentleman of about seventy-five, a lifelong resident of the small town of Neustadt, who has been committed to strict, almost military discipline since his youth. Short and lean, he wears heavy-framed glasses and is always dressed in a suit, even when taking out the trash. His old-fashioned style, calm voice, and personal charm have remained unchanged over the years. He is a man accustomed to a certain level of respect and order, which he considers an inseparable part of human relations. Deep down, however, Herbert is gentle and even vulnerable — his shy nature often keeps him from firmly asserting his rights.
The Family Upstairs: Lively Newcomers
A family from Ghana, who had moved to Germany in search of a better life, turned out not to be entirely prepared for the strict rules of European co-existence. The young mother, Annette, is an active and independent woman raising two mischievous twin boys, Ted and Mike, who bring plenty of energy and life to the otherwise grey apartment building. They are cheerful, loud and, of course, simply cannot sit still, turning the apartment into a makeshift sports arena.
Ted and Mike find their elderly neighbor quite amusing, even eccentric. Sometimes they secretly watch him sit down in his chair or leave the apartment leaning on his imposing cane, and jokingly imitate his serious demeanor and mannerisms. Poking fun at his unhurried movements and old-fashioned habits, they nonetheless see nothing offensive in it. To them, he is a slightly funny old man straight out of a German comic strip — only real.
The Incident Itself
It all began when Herbert, tired of the endless stomping and shouting at inconvenient hours, decided to go upstairs and, leaning on his cane, knock on the door. Annette answered and, without giving it much thought, responded to his request in her native language, intending to slam the door in his face before he had even finished speaking. But Mr. Claussen, offended by such treatment, wedged his cane into the doorway, determined to get an explanation. Unexpectedly, the woman yanked the door with such force that Herbert’s cane, which was above her head, slipped and struck her on the head. Furious, Annette chased after Herbert down the stairs with a metal object in her hand, intent on putting the offender “in his place.” Emotions ran high, and the next day Annette filed a police report accusing him of causing bodily harm.
The Criminal Case and the Lawyer’s Work
After Mr. Claussen came to our law firm, his case was taken on by a criminal defense lawyer — a specialist with extensive experience in criminal law. Understanding that the case was still at the investigative stage (German: Ermittlungsverfahren), and that any delay or ill-considered step could worsen the position of an elderly client, the lawyer set to work with a high degree of professional thoroughness.
Reviewing the Case File
First, the lawyer requested all materials relating to the case. He obtained copies of the police reports, witness statements, a medical report on the bodily harm, and other documents that could shed light on the events of the incident. The lawyer carefully reviewed each document, paying attention to small details that might prove useful for the defense.
While analyzing the file, the lawyer identified several key inconsistencies between the victim’s statement and the police reports. For instance, it was noted that the victim had claimed the blow to her head had been struck deliberately and with the cane, which pointed toward a more serious charge (§224 StGB), involving the intentional use of a dangerous object. However, the lawyer drew attention to evidence indicating that Claussen had not acted with intentional violence but had merely been trying to stop the door from closing.
Meeting the Client and Developing a Strategy
After reviewing the file, the lawyer invited Mr. Claussen for a conversation. He wanted not only to hear the client’s own account of events but also to understand his personal characteristics, which could be useful in court to portray a peaceful and vulnerable elderly man not inclined toward conflict.
During the conversation, the lawyer noted Claussen’s gentle, delicate character and his sincere regret that the situation had escalated into a conflict at all. Over the course of the discussion, the lawyer determined that the client was not sufficiently confident in his rights and did not understand how to conduct himself properly in such a situation to avoid trouble. These traits allowed the lawyer to develop a defense line based on the absence of intent in Claussen’s actions and his lack of experience in such situations.
Drafting and Filing the Petition With the Prosecutor’s Office
Convinced of his client’s innocence, the lawyer drafted and filed a petition with the public prosecutor’s office to discontinue the case. In it, the lawyer clearly set out the key aspects of the case:
- No intent and no use of force. The lawyer emphasized that Mr. Claussen’s actions were not aimed at causing harm and that the incident had occurred by accident. He relied on §223 StGB, pointing out that causing minor bodily harm requires proof of intent.
- No dangerous object was used. The lawyer stated that the cane Claussen was leaning on did not qualify as a dangerous object within the meaning of §224 StGB, and had been used solely to maintain his balance — ruling out the more serious charge involving the intentional use of dangerous objects.
- The client’s psychological state and age. The lawyer explained that his client, an elderly man in poor health, had been under stress due to the loss of his usual peace and quiet. Claussen’s actions were not the result of aggression, but a forced reaction from an elderly man unfamiliar with the new realities of life in an apartment building.
The Conversation With the Prosecutor and Further Defense
After filing the petition, the lawyer held a phone conversation with the prosecutor to present his position in person. He pointed out that bringing the case to trial would not serve justice, since his client was a vulnerable elderly man for whom any punishment would be excessively harsh. The lawyer cited precedents in which similar cases had been discontinued under §153 of the Strafprozessordnung (StPO) where there was no genuine intent to cause harm and the incident was of minor significance.
Thanks to the lawyer’s persistence and well-reasoned approach, the prosecutor agreed to discontinue the case, sparing Claussen from any possible punishment.
Epilogue: What Might Have Happened
Had Herbert Claussen decided to handle matters on his own, without seeking help from an experienced lawyer, he could have faced far more serious consequences. Without a proper understanding of the criminal code and the charges he faced, he might well have admitted guilt, not realizing that doing so would only worsen his position. Had the charges under §224 StGB been confirmed, Mr. Claussen could have faced anywhere from three months to five years’ imprisonment for using a dangerous object — even if that “use” had been unintentional.
The risk of punishment would have been considerably higher had Claussen admitted the charges, believing he could avoid punishment through the prosecutor’s “leniency.”
All rights reserved. Copying or republishing this article requires a link to the original source.
