“My client is shocked! He still firmly rejects the allegation, which is downright absurd,” emphasized lawyer Hubert Stanglechner on Thursday, shortly after his client – the father of six-year-old Leon – was taken into custody. A criticism that the regional court in Innsbruck does not want to put to rest: “Court decisions are not absurd,” it said.
It is legitimate to criticize court decisions. “But such criticism must remain objective and be presented objectively. Repeatedly accusing the court and the public prosecutor’s office that decisions are “plainly absurd” is a far cry from factual criticism and is out of the question,” the Innsbruck court said in a statement on Friday.
“Decisions are justified accordingly”
The judiciary makes decisions “solely on the basis of objective and factual considerations.” These decisions are reasoned accordingly. Those involved could defend themselves against this with a legal remedy. “The imposition of pre-trial detention is only permissible at the request of the public prosecutor and only if the suspect is strongly suspected of a particular crime, has been questioned by the court about the matter and the requirements for pre-trial detention and there is a reason for it detention.”
“The regional court has imposed pre-trial detention on the 38-year-old father of the six-year-old boy, who drowned in the Kitzbüheler Ache at the end of August, due to the risk of collusion and the risk of committing a crime due to the strong suspicion of the crime of murder and the offense of pretending to be a criminal offense,” said Hansjörg Mayr, spokesman for the Innsbruck public prosecutor, on Thursday.
‘My client would never influence witnesses’
“The presumed risk of collusion cannot be assumed because my client would never influence witnesses. If that came out later, it would ruin his credibility,” Stanglechner said. “My client has also sworn not to speak to witnesses.” “For my client, that is just as absurd as the accusation that he killed his own child.”
Further instructions and alleged contradictions, for example in the descriptions of persons, are not understandable or sufficient for the lawyer.
Pre-trial detention may not be ordered even if there is a reason for detention, “if it is disproportionate to the importance of the case or the expected punishment or the purpose can be achieved by less serious means”, the regional court stressed. . The court’s decision is based on these standards, taking into account currently available research results. “Accusing the judiciary of making absurd decisions here must be firmly rejected.”
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
