"It is easier to accuse than to defend: it is easier to inflict wounds than to heal them."
Marcus Fabius Quintilian
Never say never — an old saying well worth remembering when it comes to traffic accidents. Any driver can end up in an accident on the road. Traffic accidents, unfortunately, happen even to experienced drivers. A "traffic accident" is a fairly broad concept that includes not only serious crashes with significant damage but also small scratches, such as those left on someone else's car while pulling out of a parking spot. In a number of cases, drivers aren't even aware that they've caused property damage to someone else, which does not exempt them from liability or lessen the penalty.
Every driver in Germany, including tourists, whether behind the wheel of a car or even riding a bicycle, must be aware that, if involved in a traffic accident, they are required to take certain steps to deal with its consequences. In such a situation, it's essential not to panic and instead to respond appropriately, observing all the formalities required by the traffic rules. So the first commandment for any driver involved in an accident in Germany is: stay at the scene and make it possible to establish the circumstances of the incident. Exceptions to this rule apply only in special cases, for example when injured parties need to be taken to a hospital.
It's worth remembering that a number of offenses relate to failing to comply with legal requirements after a road accident, for which German criminal law provides for liability. Under the provisions of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB), the most serious of these offenses in connection with traffic accidents are:
- unlawfully leaving the scene of an accident (§ 142 StGB),
- endangering road traffic (§ 315c StGB),
- driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated (§ 316 StGB).
As a rule, leaving the scene of an accident is understood to mean a driver, who was involved in a traffic accident, leaving the scene in breach of the applicable traffic rules. This is an offense that can result in the loss of the driving licence. A person is considered to have left the scene of an accident if that person was involved in the accident and left the scene before they:
- had, in the interest of the other parties involved and the injured party, allowed their identity, vehicle, and the nature of the incident to be established by staying present and stating that they had been involved in the accident, or
- had waited the period of time reasonably required, under the circumstances, for someone to be available to record the details of the incident (the waiting period).
The penalty for this offense ranges from a fine to up to three years' imprisonment. This applies not only to whoever directly caused the accident but also to anyone who could in some way have contributed to it occurring. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for a person to be wrongly accused of causing a traffic accident. In this article, we tell the story of one episode from our varied legal practice in which we were able to help a client avoid an undeserved penalty for a traffic accident she was alleged to have been involved in.
The Client's Story: A Summons for Questioning in a Case She Knew Nothing About
A young woman came to our firm for legal help — let's call her Olga — who found herself in an ambiguous situation. Her problem required a professional's immediate attention, since our client had in hand a summons to appear at a police interview and present a car registered in her name for inspection. This interview was needed as part of the investigative steps in criminal proceedings concerning leaving the scene of a traffic accident. The attorney at our firm who took on the case first listened carefully to the client and asked her to think about what might have prompted such a summons. The conversation between the attorney and the client went on for quite some time, but Olga could not recall anything specific that might explain it.
Through a series of guided questions, she explained that she only used the car on weekends for trips with her husband to go shopping. Most of the time, her husband was the one driving. She described her husband as an exceptionally calm and level-headed driver with many years of driving experience. According to Olga, he had been involved in a few minor accidents in the past, with only slight damage; those cases had long since been closed and forgotten. Try as she might, she could not recall any recent incidents — apart from some altercation on the road that she and her husband had witnessed on their way home. But, according to Olga, nothing had happened either to her or to her husband, who held the right to drive the car, that could explain proceedings being brought against her for leaving the scene of an accident. She also said her husband was the only person authorized to drive the car registered in her name. What's more, the blue Opel Vectra was no longer new — it was a 2009 model. There was, of course, some damage to the paintwork, but a careful inspection found no new scratches.
The Investigation: A Mismatched Description of the Driver
To clarify the situation and choose the best defense strategy for our client, we requested the case file from the police. As it turned out, our client was suspected of leaving the scene of a traffic accident, an offense that carried a substantial fine or up to three years' imprisonment. The complaint against the woman had been filed by a young man — let's call him Dmitry. According to him, the driver of Olga's car had scratched his car while overtaking in heavy traffic and had then fled the scene. The complaint stated that the suspected driver responsible for the accident was driving a blue Opel Vectra and was a dark-haired man over 50 years old. The file also contained a photo of the blue Opel, but it was not possible to fully make out the license plate.
On the strength of this circumstantial evidence, suspicion had thus fallen on Olga for being involved in the accident and leaving the scene. While our client's husband might well have driven along the stretch of the autobahn where the accident occurred, there was no way he could have clipped a car in the next lane and so recklessly fled the scene. On top of that, he did not match the description of the driver who had left the scene, as recorded in the file. Our client's husband was a fair-haired man of 38.
The Attorney's Work: Inspecting the Car and Refuting the Suspicion
To defend Olga and her husband quickly and effectively against these wrongful accusations, we advised her to attend a police interview in connection with the case and to present the car for inspection. Naturally, the attorney handling the client's case accompanied her to these investigative steps, carefully ensuring that her rights and legitimate interests were fully respected and giving the necessary statements on her behalf. After the police had inspected the car and confirmed there was no recent damage, we prepared and filed a petition with the public prosecutor's office requesting that the criminal case be discontinued under § 170, paragraph 2, of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung, StPO), for lack of sufficient grounds. The petition was accompanied by a carefully prepared set of supporting documents. We pointed out that there was insufficient evidence in the file to establish that the accident had occurred involving our client's car and that the scene had been left. We also provided information about Olga's husband, noting that he was authorized to drive her car — but that he did not match the description, given in Dmitry's complaint, of the man who had caused the accident.
Outcome: The Case Was Dropped for Lack of Sufficient Grounds
After reviewing the circumstances set out in our petition, together with the case file provided by the police, the public prosecutor's office made the only correct decision: to discontinue the criminal proceedings for lack of sufficient grounds. Needless to say, our client and her husband were overjoyed.
Conclusion
We would remind our readers once again that breaking the law in Germany, and any well-founded or unfounded suspicion of having done so, is a very serious matter. One can end up a suspect or defendant in a criminal case "out of stupidity," "out of ignorance," or, as in this story, through an unfortunate coincidence. Even if you are entirely certain of your innocence, we recommend you turn without delay to a professional you trust. Doing so will help you avoid an undeserved penalty and save you a great deal of time and stress. Only a professional attorney with years of experience and the right qualifications can choose the strategy and tactics best suited to your case, quickly gather evidence, and present it skillfully — which will undoubtedly lead to a successful outcome even in the most complex case.
All rights reserved. Copying or republishing this article requires a link to the original source.
