Rocker rivalry: Giessen verdict after attack on Shishabar in Offenbach

In the process of an attack on a hookah bar in Offenbach, the verdict was pronounced at the Giessen regional court. For judge Andreas Wellenkötter there remains a stale aftertaste.

Prosecutor Rouven Spieler is known for his pointed, but at the same time tongue-in-cheek pleadings. In his closing remarks in the process of an attack on a hookah bar in Offenbach in 2016, he found the right words for the facts negotiated at the regional court in Gießen: “Help friends with moving – yes. Help friends with dismantling a bar – no.” And: “One demonstrates masculinity by behaving confidently.”

Trial in Gießen: warnings and suspended sentences

The deed, which the “Stolzenmorgen” branch was about for a month, was four years ago. The seven defendants were accused of having stormed a shisha bar and attacked guests as part of a group of 18 in Offenbach. Among other things, a man who was attacked was injured with a knife. The background is supposed to be rivalries between the Kurdish rocker-like group Bahoz, from whose environment the men are said to come, and the Turkish nationalist Ottomans Germania.

The court, chaired by Judge Andreas Wellenkötter, regards it as proven that four of the defendants were involved in the “attack-like action” on the hookah bar. They were unequivocally recognized on surveillance videos – also by a police officer from Giessen who knew the scene. Three of them – two 22-year-olds and one 23-year-old – warned the court of dangerous bodily harm and serious breach of the peace. You have to pay 1500 euros each to the victim support organization Weißer Ring. A 26-year-old defendant was sentenced to ten months suspended sentence for dangerous physical harm and violating the peace. The court acquitted two 25-year-old defendants – they could not be seen on the videos. The victim’s statement was also inconclusive in these two cases. The trial against the seventh defendant was severed (see box).

Those involved in the process agree that the dispute over a woman was the trigger for the act of revenge on that June evening four years ago. The later victim had beaten one of the defendants in this confrontation. The conflict between Bahoz and the Ottomans played a subordinate role, said prosecutor Spieler. “Dortmund and Schalke fans could also have been involved.” The action had nothing to do with organized crime.

Nevertheless, the attack on the Shishabar was no triviality. The now 32-year-old victim could have died if one of the stitches had penetrated deeper into the neck. “Then you would have had a person on your conscience”, emphasized the prosecutor, “because of such children’s stuff.”

The court assumes that the act of revenge has gotten out of hand. Who stabbed with the knife can no longer be traced. In addition, the attack had meanwhile been four years, Bahoz had been dissolved, the defendants no longer had any harmful tendencies and they had a favorable social prognosis.

Trial in Giessen: Two defendants apologize

The 26-year-old accused had already given extensive evidence to the police. During the trial, two other men were also partly involved in the allegations. Lawyer Thorsten Marowsky stated that his 23-year-old client was a “pawn” and “haphazard follower”. The defense attorney for a 22-year-old defendant, Dagmar Nautscher, said the act arose out of an “egomaniacal sense of honor”. The client of defense attorney Alexander Hauer had not testified. In contrast to the public prosecutor, he saw no objective evidence that the 22-year-old man was involved. Therefore his client is to be acquitted. The board did not agree with this assessment.

Two of the defendants took the opportunity to say a few words. The 23-year-old said, “I’m sorry, it won’t happen again.” And von Nautscher’s client emphasized, “I have arrived in life and want to look ahead”. Judge Wellenkötter also wanted to get rid of something in the end. It is their right that most of the accused are silent or only partially testify. But it would have served them well to say more. “The impression was not created that you distanced yourself from the fact,” stressed Wellenkötter. And finally asked the rhetorical question: “Does the spirit of this group still exist?”

Those: Giessen General

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on email
Email

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.