During the Corona pandemic, some things may have been exaggerated by some health authorities and health politicians. But hindsight is easier said than done: the slogan “pandemic of the unvaccinated” that has recently been discussed again and the pressure that has been put on those unwilling to be vaccinated are examples.
On the other hand, there has been a radicalization among some anti-vaxxers and corona deniers that makes one shake one’s head. Perhaps the most disgusting thing that happened in Germany, the land of the Holocaust, was the attempt by extremist anti-vaxxers to hijack the yellow star used by the Nazis to mark and humiliate the Jewish population for their own purposes.
As a defendant, very small with hat
One of the agitators from back then, 43-year-old supermarket employee Thomas K. (name changed) from Overath, now had to answer to the criminal judge for five of his comments on Facebook in 2021 and 2022.
There, the father of two children appeared very small and wearing a hat. He distanced himself from his agitation and tried to explain how, as an unvaccinated person, he felt increasingly isolated and could no longer go to a restaurant with his parents.
On Facebook he made racist comments
However, his posts from that time were too drastic to be forgotten. He had described people with Asian facial features as “abnormal”; “We don’t want anything like that here.” He included a comparison of West German vaccination policy with Nazi terror, trivializing the Nazi genocide of the Jews, and also a photo of Adolf Hitler.
Use of symbols of unconstitutional and terrorist organizations, incitement and insult: the charges included a number of things. The defendant had lodged an objection against an initial penal order in due form and within the deadline.
I said some crap on Facebook and Telegram back then. I’m really sorry about that.
The defendant in court
After the charges were read out, defense attorney Markus Glietz asked for a legal discussion with the lawyers behind closed doors. This lasted four minutes, after which the defendant said: “I said some crap on Facebook and Telegram back then. I’m really sorry about that.” In the meantime, Thomas K. continued, he has been “out of it” for over a year. And: “I wasn’t myself back then.” The pressure on those who had not been vaccinated had become ever greater, but he did not want to be vaccinated, could basically only commute between work and home and spent a lot of time on the computer.
Judge Miriam Kuschel asked what was going on with the Hitler picture and the Holocaust. The clear answer was: “That is completely unacceptable,” and “incitement against people is completely unacceptable.”
Punishment is far above the lower limit for the police clearance certificate
The prosecutor credited the defendant with his credible remorse, but: “It is still a criminal offence.” For the five offences, he demanded a fine of 150 daily rates of 40 euros each, i.e. 6,000 euros. Defence lawyer Glietz pointed out that his client regretted and repented of the offences. He had “lost his temper” at the time. In particular, he asked for a fine of less than 91 daily rates so that the conviction would not appear on the police certificate of good conduct. Thomas K. himself said in his final words: “I’m sorry. I’m not a bad person.”
Judge Kuschel did not grant the defense attorney’s request for a U91 sentence, but imposed the 150 daily rates of 40 euros each requested by the public prosecutor. The judge pointed out that the sentence for a single offense is three months to five years in prison. She credited the defendant with confessing, having no previous convictions, and showing “honest remorse.”
In the end, the penalty imposed corresponds to that of the penalty order: 6,000 euros. In the judgment, it was 150 times 40 euros daily rate, in the penalty order it would have been 200 times 30 euros daily rate.
