2002 Juridical Aspects of the Trials against Serial Killer Juergen Bartsch

From Mark Benecke Forensic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Quelle: International Academy of Forensic Sciences (IAFS), Meeting in Montpellier, France, OC-259

Meeting of the IAFS


[Weitere Artikel von MB] [Artikel über MB]


Objectives: Investigation into a turning point of German juridical proceedings. Here, we focus on the multiple psychiatric decisions on the mental state of a juvenile, pedophile, homosexual serial killer, and the influence of those decisions on the trial. Nature of the study: Case analysis by use of court files.

Materials and methods: As above.

Results and Conclusion: In former times, the question whether an offen der was considered insane or not by the court did not have any impact on the outcome of a criminal trial. Today, it is generally accepted that mentally disturbed offenders should be treated differently from sane offenders. The question whether a person can be held responsible for his actions depends on either his current state of mind during the action of his crime, or on his general mental constitution. This means that the expert witness has great influence on wether a criminal can be pronounced guilty, and responsible for his actions. If the expert comes to the conclusion that the offender could not control his actions due to a mental illness he cannot be convicted. In this case he can only be sent to a mental institution.

Our investigations into the court files of the Bartsch case shows that his trials in the 1960's marked a turning point in the history of German criminal jurisdiction. The stages of appeal in the Bartsch trial document how numerous different psychiatric opinions influenced the decicion of the court. In the first trial (1967), the opinion was formed that Bartsch could be held responsible for his criminal acts (he was sentenced to life-long imprisonment). In the second trial, a large number of psychiatrists and researchers specialized in sexual sciences were asked for expert opinions in the case. This led to the conclusion that in juridical terms he was not responsible for the crimes. In 1971, Bartsch was (a) regarded as being a juvenile offender and therefore formally sentenced to ten years of incarceration in a mental institution (maximum sentence for juveniles; followed by a possible continuation of arrest).

In contrast to the now changed verdict of the court, the second trial left the impression that no fundamental changes in juridical perception took place regarding the massive changes in forensic psychiatry that had obviously taken place.

Suggested Readings

Dr. rer. medic. Mark Benecke · Diplombiologe (verliehen in Deutschland) · Öffentlich bestellter und vereidigter Sachverständiger für kriminaltechnische Sicherung, Untersuchung u. Auswertung von biologischen Spuren (IHK Köln) · Landsberg-Str. 16, 50678 Köln, Deutschland, E-Mail: forensic@benecke.com · www.benecke.com · Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: ID: DE212749258 · Aufsichtsbehörde: Industrie- und Handelskammer zu Köln, Unter Sachsenhausen 10-26, 50667 Köln, Deutschland · Fallbearbeitung und Termine nur auf echtem Papier. Absprachen per E-mail sind nur vorläufige Gedanken und nicht bindend. 🗺 Dr. Mark Benecke, M. Sc., Ph.D. · Certified & Sworn In Forensic Biologist · International Forensic Research & Consulting · Postfach 250411 · 50520 Cologne · Germany · Text SMS in criminalistic emergencies (never call me): + · Anonymous calls & suppressed numbers will never be answered. · Dies ist eine Notfall-Nummer für SMS in aktuellen, kriminalistischen Notfällen). · Rufen Sie niemals an. · If it is not an actual emergency, send an e-mail. · If it is an actual emergency, send a text message (SMS) · Never call. · Facebook Fan Site · Benecke Homepage · Instagram Fan Page · Datenschutz-Erklärung · Impressum · Archive Page · Kein Kontakt über soziale Netzwerke. · Never contact me via social networks since I never read messages & comments there.