Dead girl (8) from the Könizbergwald forest Defense lawyer raises doubts +++ Mother becomes entangled in contradictions

In February 2022, a mother allegedly killed her eight-year-old daughter in the Könizbergwald forest near Bern. The appeal trial starts today at the Bernese High Court. blue News reports live.

Keystone-SDA

17.03.2025, 04:49

17.03.2025, 16:17

SDA

• Liveticker

  New posts
• Liveticker closed
4.17 p.m.

Was the accused overburdened as a mother?

Now the defense lawyer contradicts the statements of the lower court, according to which the accused was an overburdened mother. The victim's teacher had confirmed that she had always perceived the accused as supportive of her daughter. Although the accused had been suffering from depression due to a recent separation, this had already subsided at the time of the crime.

16.10 hrs

Lack of resuscitation is not suspicious

According to the defense attorney, the fact that the accused and her mother did not attempt resuscitation despite telephone requests from the paramedics was due to the extraordinary situation. It is understandable that people do not act rationally in such a state of shock. Especially as the mother of the accused was also unable to initiate resuscitation.

3.51 p.m.

Media prejudgement

His client had already been prejudged by the media before the first day of the trial, the defense lawyer explained. Headlines such as "The child murderer from Könizbergwald" had significantly shaped the opinion of later witness statements.

3.27 p.m.

Defense lawyer questions the credibility of the main witness

Now the lawyer is questioning the credibility of the most important witness. The cell phone data of the 12-year-old at the time did not match his statements. In addition, the boy had made contradictory statements regarding sightings of the accused and her daughter on the day of the crime.

The route taken by the accused and the victim to the forest on the day of the crime was determined by a sniffer dog. According to witnesses, however, they were on a different path. "One of them is mistaken," says the lawyer.

Statements from his teacher would also strengthen the impression that the 12-year-old had only constructed his statements. "The whole story can only be made up - or he saw it on a different day," says the defense lawyer. For him, it was clear: "I am of the opinion that the boy is mistaken."

3.21 p.m.

"Then the prosecution's construct collapses"

The mother of the accused testified in the morning that she had heard her granddaughter crying at around 6.15 p.m. on the evening of the crime and then asked her daughter about the child's well-being. The defense lawyer refers to this and says: "If this really was the victim, the whole construct of the prosecution collapses." The reason: if this is true, the chronology of the crime of which the accused is accused does not add up.

3.15 p.m.

Is there another murder weapon?

It is not clear beyond doubt when the accused's DNA traces were found on the alleged murder weapon, a stone. According to the defense lawyer, it can be assumed that the traces do not date from the day the body was found. In addition, there is much to suggest that the victim was not only violently attacked with the aforementioned stone.

3.08 p.m.

Accused allegedly did not act according to plan

"Why should my client post a photo of a hiding place that was actually planned as a crime scene?" - The defense lawyer is also asking this question rhetorically. Nothing about the accused's behavior or her cooperation with the police suggests that the defendant carried out a murder according to plan, as she is accused of doing.

2.59 pm

Mysterious corona mask

His client had posted a picture of the forest hideout on Facebook. Since her profile was public, the tree house could not be considered a secret hiding place. It was also possible that the victim had shown the hiding place to someone.

The lawyer also mentions a hygiene mask that was found in the forest area and had male DNA on it. This tip was not followed up. This also suggests that the investigation had only been conducted in one direction.

2.38 p.m.

The police allegedly did not investigate objectively

The lawyer cites examples to support the one-sided investigation by the police: Out of hundreds of joint pictures on the defendants' cell phone, the police had only evaluated those in which the daughter was depicted with injuries. In addition, the cell phone was only examined for one-sided keywords such as "child abuse". This was intended to create the "image of a bad mother".

"Wouldn't it be part of a balanced investigation to also find out who else was in the forest apart from the accused?" the lawyer asks rhetorically. He particularly criticizes the fact that the alibi of the suspected ex-boyfriend of the accused was not sufficiently checked.

2.34 pm

Defense lawyer demands acquittal

"My client seemed suspicious to the police right from the start," says the defense lawyer at the beginning of his presentation. It is well known that officers often want to confirm their initial suspicions. The questioning was accordingly one-sided.

The defense lawyer demanded an acquittal and immediate release. His client should also be compensated for the time she has spent in prison.

2.30 p.m.

The trial continues

The trial resumes. The pleas of the defense and the prosecution are now on the agenda. The defense begins.

1.04 p.m.

Questioning is over - pleas to follow in the afternoon

This concludes the questioning of the accused. The pleas will follow in the afternoon. The trial will continue at 2.30 pm.

12.50 p.m.

Outraged, but calm

The accused is asked why she is not outraged if a third party is apparently responsible for her daughter's death and she herself is innocent and in custody. "I'm outraged, but I'd rather deal with it myself and not show it to the outside world," she replies.

She is worried that another child could fall victim to this possible third-party perpetrator. She then repeats that her ex-boyfriend is a possible perpetrator.

12.33 p.m.

Hands full of blood or not?

According to the accused, her hands were covered in blood. Today in court, she remembers that there was blood on at least one hand because she had checked her daughter's pulse. However, when the police arrived at the time, they did not find any blood on the accused's hands. The accused had no explanation for this. She had probably put her hands in the jacket bag to protect them from the cold.

12.26 p.m.

"I wouldn't kill my child for any man in the world"

At the end of the questioning, a possible motive is discussed. According to the lower court, the accused may have been overwhelmed as a single mother and may have wanted to resume the relationship with her ex-boyfriend.

The accused denies this: "I wouldn't kill my child for any man in the world." She could not explain why her daughter had to die.

In her questioning in the morning, her mother had brought the ex-boyfriend into play as a possible perpetrator (see entry at 10.22 a.m.). The accused said: "He behaved very strangely, especially in the days after he found her, for example with this letter. I don't know whether I believe he could have committed such an act, but I can't rule it out."

12.17 p.m.

Accused about witnesses: "I've never seen this boy before"

A witness, a 12-year-old boy at the time, said he saw the accused going into the woods with her daughter at the time in question. "I've never seen this boy before," replied the accused. She had been at home.

12.07 p.m.

Stone raises further questions

The judge draws the accused's attention to contradictory statements: on the one hand, she testified that she had only carried the stone as far as the tree house and had not touched it afterwards. In another interrogation, she stated that she had turned the stone several times in order to decorate the tree house.

"It's difficult to remember every detail exactly," said the accused. She could no longer remember exactly how many times she had touched the stone.

The location of the stone also raises questions. Photos do not show the stone where the defendant says it was always located. She cannot explain exactly why this is the case.

"This stone had no relevance for me at all," says the accused. For her, it was just a gadget of the tree house. "I had no way of knowing that this stone would become so important."

11.55 a.m.

Daughter "absolutely" wanted the stone

The alleged murder weapon is now being discussed. The victim's blood and hair as well as traces of her mother's DNA have been found on the stone. The mother explains the latter because she and her daughter had collected materials to build the tree hut. Her daughter had discovered the stone in question and "absolutely" wanted to take it with her.

The day after the body was found, the accused drew the police's attention to the stone on her own initiative. She only did this "to help the police" - and not because she was explicitly concerned with the evidence.

11.45 a.m.

"Better to say nothing than something wrong"

The judge is now trying to find out on which days the accused was able to visit the forest hideout. To this end, the accused's agenda at the time will be reconstructed as far as possible. However, the accused's memory is incomplete: "I'd rather say nothing than give false information," she says several times.

The reconstruction shows that the accused could only have visited the forest hideout once after building it. This contradicts her original statement during police questioning that she had been there almost every day. "I at least intended to go several times," says the accused in response.

11.34 a.m.

Statement contradicts cell phone data

It was more of a tepee than a tree house, which only had room for the daughter. "We wanted to extend the tree house at a later date," says the accused. She no longer knew how often she had been there with her daughter - but it had been several times.

According to her cell phone data, however, the accused was only there on the day the tree house was built, January 24, 2022. She could not explain this because she had certainly been there several times and always had her cell phone with her.

11.28 a.m.

Secret hiding place was not secret

"The hiding place wasn't a secret to me," says the accused. However, her daughter had insisted that the tree house not be built on the edge of the forest to protect it from being used or destroyed by others.

She had told her mother and at least one other person about the small hut. It is also possible that the hiding place was found by other people, as there was another hut nearby.

11.22 a.m.

How did the forest hideout come about?

The judge wants to know how the joint hiding place in the woods came about. "I had a lot of time due to several compensation days," said the defendant. She had gone into the forest with her daughter and tied branches and stones together with string to make a little house. The daughter made a heart with white stones. They also used Christmas baubles for decoration.

11.09 a.m.

"Then I saw them lying there"

The accused is now asked to describe the course of the day on February 1, 2022. She was at home, listened to music and also consumed beer. Her daughter had been with a friend. Her mother told her on the phone that the girl was not with them.

The accused then searched the neighborhood and the nearby playground for her daughter. Her mother supported her. "In order not to alert the police too hastily, we wanted to check the hiding place in the woods first," explains the accused.

Once there, she first recognized her daughter's jacket. "Then I saw her lying there", she says in tears. She shook her daughter, but she did not react. She and her mother then called the ambulance. "It was dark, we couldn't see exactly where the blood was coming from. We couldn't feel a pulse."

The ambulance asked them to resuscitate the girl. "We were in such a state of shock that we couldn't do it," says the defendant.

The officers who arrived took her and her mother to the police station. "It was an eternity before we learned that my daughter could no longer be saved," says the defendant.

11 a.m.

"I did not kill my daughter"

"I did not kill my daughter," says the accused in an initial statement after the indictment was read out. She would never put her mother through the sight of her dead granddaughter.

10.55 a.m.

"You can't forget something like that"

"The incident is always present", says the accused in a composed voice. Her emotional state is "difficult", something like that "you just can't forget". According to the judge, she has behaved well in prison. With regard to the appeal proceedings, however, she had withdrawn. "I needed my peace and quiet," she says.

10.49 a.m.

The accused is now being questioned

The trial resumes. The accused is now being questioned.

10.22 a.m.

Witness brings possible suspect into play

"It could have been someone who wanted to take revenge on my daughter," says the witness when asked about this. She also has a specific suspect in mind: her daughter's ex-boyfriend. "When we broke up, he said to my daughter: 'You'll pay for this'", says the witness. He had also left a letter on her daughter's doorstep shortly after the girl's death. She found this bizarre.

This concludes the questioning of the accused's mother. The trial is then interrupted for a break. It resumes at 10.45 am.

10.16 a.m.

"A senseless death"

Just over three years ago, the witness found the dead girl together with her daughter. The judge wants to know how she deals with it today. "I still can't understand why this had to happen," says the witness. She has sought the help of a psychological counselor. With a shaky voice, she says: "It was a senseless death."

10.12 a.m.

Location of the tree hut was secret

The judge now has several questions for the witness. She does not remember exactly what the police questioned her about, she says. She had learned about the tree hut - the alleged crime scene - the day after the accused and the victim had built it. "My granddaughter told me about the tree hut. She had wanted one for a long time," says the mother of the accused.

She did not know exactly where the tree hut was located in the forest. "It was supposed to be a secret place where the two of them could be together."

9.59 a.m.

"There was blood everywhere"

The search had continued in the forest, as the accused had suggested looking at their shared hiding place - a self-built tree hut. "That's when my daughter suddenly discovered my granddaughter's jacket," says the witness.

They then discovered the girl's lifeless body. "There was blood everywhere," the grandmother recalls. Her daughter checked the girl's pulse on her neck, but they immediately had the impression that the child was dead. However, they were both frozen and in shock.

9.53 a.m.

"I thought it could be my granddaughter"

"I spoke to my daughter on the phone after midday," says the mother of the accused. She had spent the whole afternoon at home. Towards evening, she received a message from her daughter saying that her granddaughter was at a friend's house and that she would pick her up later.

She then heard a child crying outside, says the mother of the accused. "I thought it could be my granddaughter," she says. She then found out that her granddaughter was not with the friend in question. The accused and her mother then set off in search of the missing child.

9.43 a.m.

Now the mother of the accused is being questioned

The question now is whether the mother of the accused should be admitted as a witness or not. She was present when the girl was found lifeless in the forest. For the public prosecutor's office, questioning the witness is superfluous as the essential facts are already recorded in the police report. However, the court follows the arguments of the defense and allows the witness to be questioned.

9.29 a.m.

Next interruption - trial continues

The trial is interrupted again. The court discusses further motions for evidence and preliminary questions. The defendant's lawyer has mentioned passages in the minutes of the first interrogation that he wants to keep in the minutes.

The trial is now resumed. The questioning of the accused should begin shortly.

8.58 a.m.

Brief interruption

The trial was briefly interrupted because the defendants' lawyer had to examine a piece of evidence at short notice. Now it continues. The defendant appears composed.

8.47 a.m.

The trial begins

The accused has entered the courtroom with a slow gait. Senior judge Nicolas Wuillemin, who is presiding over the trial together with two other senior judges, opens the appeal proceedings. He welcomes all those present and introduces the procedure.

8.24 a.m.

Great interest in the appeal proceedings

The case has aroused great interest both nationally and internationally. This can also be felt in the Bernese High Court on Monday. There is already a traffic jam at the entrance. Cameras are positioned in front of the court. Numerous people are waiting outside the courtroom to be admitted. The trial is being held in public. However, visitors and media representatives had to register in advance.

The trial is scheduled to start at 8.30 am. As the doors are still locked, it is likely to be delayed by a few minutes. blue News is on site and reporting in the live ticker.

Show more

This Monday, a woman convicted of murdering her daughter in the first instance will stand before the Bern High Court. The defendant maintains her innocence to this day.

The eight-year-old girl was found dead in the Könizbergwald forest in February 2022, not far from where her mother and daughter lived. The girl's mother was arrested a short time later. She is said to have hit the child with a stone in the forest.

There was no clear evidence. The Bern-Mittelland Regional Court of First Instance had to rely on circumstantial evidence in summer 2024. Ultimately, however, it saw enough of these pieces of the puzzle for an unequivocal guilty verdict for murder.

No clear motive identified

The court considered it proven that the mother lured her child into the forest under a pretext, to a small hiding place made of branches that the two had once built together. There, the 32-year-old is said to have hit the girl with a large stone. Blood and three of the victim's hairs were found on the stone, as well as a trace of the mother's DNA.

The court was unable to identify a clear motive for the crime. In any case, it must have been a blatantly selfish motive, the judges at first instance concluded.

Perhaps the mother had hoped that it would be easier to rebuild a relationship with a partner without her daughter. Or she may have wanted to get rid of the child because life as a single parent was exhausting.

The defendant recently spoke about the case in a criminal podcast in the German newspaper "Die Zeit" and once again proclaimed her innocence. She sees herself as a victim of justice.

The Bernese High Court will announce the verdict on March 24.