The trial of several alleged supporters of the Viennese attacker, which ended at the Vienna Regional Court in early February 2023 with life sentences for two suspects and long prison terms for two other men, may have to be repeated in parts. At least that is evident from a statement from the Attorney General.
As Attorney General spokesman Martin Ulrich explained on Friday, the Attorney General’s Office concluded in considering the annulment complaints of the men convicted at first instance that an appeal was partially justified. As Attorney General Ulrich emphasized, the core of the indictment – the commission of terrorist offenses in connection with involvement in murder – is not affected.
Is there really a criminal organization behind it?
It concerns the facts of the terrorist organization and the criminal organization, about which the written judgment contains shortcomings in the findings and the jury may have received misleading legal instructions, according to Ulrich.
It is still unclear when the Supreme Court (OGH), where the appeal procedure has been pending since mid-April, will decide on the nullity appeals. No hearing date has yet been scheduled for this, according to the Supreme Court. The OGH is not bound by the opinion of the Attorney General, but as a rule the croquis are taken into account because they have been drawn up by proven experts.
Now it is the turn of the Supreme Court
If the Supreme Court were to agree with the legal opinion of the Public Prosecution Service, the initial sentences of a total of five suspects would have to be annulled following an appeal for nullity and in this case with regard to the terrorist attack. organization and the criminal organization. A new trial should be ordered, limited to whether the men were part of a terrorist group and a criminal organization or whether there was a terrorist group and a criminal organization.
The core of the accusation is not affected
However, the commission of terrorist crimes in connection with involvement in murder and crimes under the War Materials Act and the Weapons Act would no longer be the subject of the proceedings – in the opinion of the Public Prosecution Service, the findings of the first court in this regard appear to be not invalid. The invalidity complaints should therefore be 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.
