GermanyGuilty verdict in the Schumacher blackmail trial
SDA
12.2.2025 - 18:27
The three defendants stand between lawyers before the verdict is announced. Photo: Oliver Berg/dpa - ATTENTION: Person(s) has/have been pixelated for legal reasons
Keystone
The judiciary has imposed up to three years in prison for the failed extortion of the family of ex-Formula 1 racing driver Michael Schumacher. The main defendant (53), who has several previous convictions, was sentenced to three years in prison by the district court in Wuppertal for attempted extortion in a particularly serious case, while his son (30) received a six-month suspended sentence for aiding and abetting the attempted extortion. A former security employee of the family (53) was also sentenced to two years' probation for aiding and abetting. All arrest warrants were revoked or suspended.
Keystone-SDA
12.02.2025, 18:27
12.02.2025, 18:28
SDA
Schumacher family ordered to pay 15 million euros
The Schumacher family had been blackmailed with the publication of private photos and videos. They were told to pay 15 million euros, otherwise the images would be published on the darknet. According to the public prosecutor's office, 900 pictures and almost 600 videos of the family as well as Michael Schumacher's digitized medical records were seized from the perpetrators. One hard disk remained missing.
Michael Schumacher has been shielded from the public eye by his family and their employees since his serious skiing accident in 2013. He suffered a serious head injury.
The main defendant and his son had confessed to the allegations. The lawyer for the third defendant, a former security employee of the Schumachers, denied the allegations and demanded an acquittal. His client had not stolen the sensitive data. The data had been offered to various witnesses well before 2024.
Penalty demands differed
The public prosecutor had demanded three years for the main defendant (53) for particularly serious extortion and four months' probation for his son (30) for aiding and abetting. It was particularly reprehensible that the 53-year-old had taken advantage of Michael Schumacher's tragic accident and the family's situation.
He had applied for a suspended sentence of one year for the ex-security employee at the Schumachers' house for aiding and abetting. He had sought revenge after his dismissal and the open rift.
Like the public prosecutor, the Schumacher family's lawyer for the joint plaintiff demanded three years in prison for the main defendant, but one year for his son for aiding and abetting and even four years in prison for the ex-security employee. He was not only an accessory, but an accomplice. He had been ordered to digitize the private recordings. Furthermore, the Schumacher family could not be blackmailed.
The defense lawyer for the main defendant had requested two years and three months in prison. He argued that the method of perpetration was amateurish and that, in his opinion, it was not a serious case of blackmail, but only a simple one. He applied for the arrest warrant to be revoked.
"A very, very disgusting thing"
"It's a very, very disgusting thing that I did. I realized that on the second day in prison. I will answer for it," said the 53-year-old, who worked as a bouncer in Constance.
The defense lawyer for the 30-year-old son of the main defendant had suggested a fine. "My client has apologized several times for the mess he made." His contribution to the crime was conceivably minor: he had merely set up an email address for his father without giving it much thought.
"Shit built"
The 53-year-old from Wuppertal had called an employee of the Schumacher family and demanded the sum of 15 million euros. Recordings of the calls were played in the courtroom. The blackmailer offered to tell the family who was behind the call.
In his confession, he had incriminated the Schumachers' former security employee: He had gotten the two hard drives with image and video material from him. He had in turn told him that he had the material from a nurse who had also worked for the Schumachers and who had been dismissed. Investigations were initiated against the nurse during the trial. The verdict is not final.