District Court of Baden
Penis picture to 13-year-old brings 21-year-old to court – but is it really from him?
A young adult was confronted with a harsh accusation before the Baden court: he was threatened with a conditional prison sentence of 7 months. But he denied the allegations.
The accused’s defense attorney asked the judge for an acquittal.
Whether he is – as it is commonly called – actually “the best piece of a man” remains to be seen. The fact is that the photo of a penis brought 21-year-old Mario (all names changed) to court. The public prosecutor had accused him of “multiple pornography”, possibly “multiple sexual acts with a child” and requested a conditional prison sentence of 7 months.
According to the indictment, Mario sent “at an unknown time in the summer of 2020, presumably from his place of residence, twice a photo via Snapchat with essentially a bared penis that was in the foreground” to the then not yet 14- year-old Nena sent. Also at an unspecified time in the summer of 2020, Mario sent the girl a video on which “a man, possibly the accused himself, manipulated or masturbated on the penis”.
The 21-year-old, with a neat haircut, a hint of a beard above and below his lips, is still in training and is a passionate football player. He appears in court in a white shirt and light gray trousers. What he is accused of, he rejects: “The allegations are not true.”
He knew Nena from school by sight. Coincidentally, they were in the same ski camp in 2020 – “I as an auxiliary manager, but not responsible for Nena”. At home they exchanged something on Snapchat and Instagram for a while. “About what?” Single judge Patrick Jegge asks. “So collegial, about nothing special, with normal photos, nothing pornographic.” He never met Nena physically. “Up until the lockdown, we exchanged ideas online intensively, after that only sporadically, and today we are no longer in contact.”
Unbelievable and contradictory
Mario’s defense attorney clearly points out that the prosecution does not contain any concrete factual information as to whether, when and where criminal acts took place at all. “The time of the crime is only set to ‘summer 2020’, the crime scene at ‘presumably my client’s place of residence’, and there were no corresponding photos or videos on either Mario’s cell phone or Nena’s.”
The only witness named by Nena only had his knowledge from hearsay, namely what the girl had told him in 2021. “Above all, Nena’s statements were peppered with contradictions, to which numerous ‘I don’t know’ were added in the interrogation protocols.” An “in dubio pro reo” acquittal is the logical request of the defense attorney.
Judge Patrick Jegge followed this straight away. Regarding the less credible statements of the plaintiff, he mentions that Nena had answered the police question as to how she had recognized that the incriminated “best piece” was Mario’s, “on the underpants”. In conclusion, Jegge notes with a wink that “today every second young man wears black underpants from Calvin Klein”.
2023-05-03 03:05:43
#Penis #picture #13yearold #brings #21yearold #court
