Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More legal stuff I just don't understand

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    More legal stuff I just don't understand

    Let me try and get this straight.

    1. A bloke administers an injection to his stepdaughter, which kills her. He claims it was a tragic accident
    2. A jury in Germany agrees and he is acquitted of manslaughter
    3. The girl's father continues to pursue the case and gets it heard in France (in the absence of the accused)
    4. The French court convicts him of manslaughter in his absence
    5. The European Court says the French court were wrong to convict him in his absence
    6. The father kidnaps the stepfather in Germany, ties him up and dumps him on the doorstep of a French courthouse
    7. He will now stand trial in France

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/30/kidnapped-doctor-krombach-loses-murder

    There's about 5 stages in that which I don't understand on pretty much any level.

    #2
    More legal stuff I just don't understand

    Wow, that's like a hypothetical for an international criminal procedure exam.

    The French claim to jurisdiction seems bizarre, but there may be a provision of French criminal law that allows for the prosecution in France of anyone accused of murdering a French national, no matter where the crime takes place. Contrary to your point 2, from what I read in the Guardian pieces, the EU bar on double jeopardy would seem not to apply because the Germans never prosecuted Krombach; this is the first trial he is attending (though he has already been convicted in absentia by a French court).

    There also seems to be some basis to the allegations, as a German court awarded Bamberski Euro 150,000 in a civil suit.

    It also isn't clear to me that Bamberski was directly involved in the kidnap (though he certainly didn't object).

    Comment

    Working...
    X