Weinfelden District Court Homicide trial aborted due to errors in the indictment
The trial for a homicide at Weinfelden district court was aborted shortly after it began. Due to errors in the description of the course of the crime, the court is demanding a revision of the indictment.
19.11.2024, 10:12
19.11.2024, 16:08
SDA
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- The trial for a homicide at the district court of Weinfelden was interrupted shortly after it began.
- The sequence of events in the indictment did not match the results of the defendant's interviews.
- According to the indictment, a now 44-year-old North Macedonian man killed his wife in their shared apartment in Erlen TG in 2023.
The trial for a homicide at Weinfelden district court was interrupted shortly after it began on Tuesday morning. The court demanded a revision of the indictment. The sequence of events in the indictment did not match the results of the previous questioning of the 44-year-old defendant.
"The indictment contains relevant errors and is not consistent with the evidence gathered in the preliminary proceedings," said the presiding judge at the beginning of the hearing. A forensic medical report also contradicts the statements in the indictment.
According to the indictment, in 2023 a North Macedonian man, now 44 years old, stabbed his wife several times and strangled her in the apartment they shared in Erlen TG. The 39-year-old was fatally injured in the process.
The presiding judge saw differences between the indictment and the transcripts from the interviews, particularly in the accounts of whether the wife was still alive when the man left her on the kitchen floor.
"The public prosecutor also established that the accused made contradictory statements," said the public prosecutor after an initial interruption to the trial. There are different ways of imagining the course of the crime.
Indictment is "borderline"
"When I read the indictment, I was shocked," explained the accused's defense lawyer. According to the lawyer, the prosecution wanted to increase the sentence with its statements. Key points as to how the crime came about had been omitted from the description. Nevertheless, the defense lawyer did not argue for the indictment to be dismissed.
The court, however, demanded such a rejection after a further interruption of the trial. The accused had to know exactly what he was accused of. "The defense said that it was difficult to prepare. We can understand that," said the presiding judge.
The indictment was "borderline". "Overall, we see no alternative but to dismiss the case in order to guarantee a lawful and clean trial," the presiding judge continued.
According to the court, the public prosecutor has 30 days to submit a new indictment. In the current version, they had demanded a conviction for murder.
