ruth901
A wild argument between two women in the middle of Bad Soden is keeping the judiciary busy: A 43-year-old has to answer for dangerous bodily harm before the Gelnhausen district court.
Bad Soden-Samünster – The encounter between the two women took place in the early evening hours of January 31st last year in Bad Soden. According to the public prosecutor's office, the 43-year-old defendant was driving her car in a traffic-calmed area at the time. At the same time, a 45-year-old woman was walking there. She had her little son in her hand, who suddenly seemed to want to break away.
“Like two furies”: physical confrontation between two women in traffic
The driver had to brake and take evasive action. This situation gave rise to a short but violent conflict between the two women. At first there was gesticulation and shouting. Then the older woman kicked the passenger door. This apparently made the defendant really angry and she got out. A fierce “hand-to-hand fight” ensued. According to the prosecution, the 43-year-old is said to have pulled her counterpart's hair, pushed her to the ground and kicked her.
The accused denied this. They would have fought each other. However, she did not push her opponent to the ground. “If I don’t hit myself now, I’ll get hit,” was what was going through her head at the time, she recalled. Accordingly, the defendant looked back self-critically and said they attacked each other “like two furies”. She also kicked “impulsively” after she had allegedly received kicks herself. She also admitted that she had irritated her counterpart by imitating engine noises.
“Never get out of the car in such a situation,” the representative of the Hanau public prosecutor’s office gave the two opponents a golden rule. It always ends badly.
Not only the injured party was called to court as witnesses, but also five other women who had witnessed the situation. But before they were heard, only the victim was called into the courtroom. The judge and prosecutor had agreed with the defendant and her defense attorney that the most sensible way to resolve the matter was outside of court – especially since both have so far led a life free from punishment.
This is to be done with a so-called “perpetrator-victim compensation” at the non-profit organization “Hanauer Hilfe”. This is an out-of-court procedure that uses communication to resolve conflicts between those accused and those injured in a crime. The aim is to resolve the crime through material or immaterial reparation, to restore legal peace and to give the victim the opportunity to better process what they have experienced.
Defendant: Incident was “so stupid”
However, both parties involved must agree to this approach in advance. After her lengthy statement, the defendant said that the whole incident was “so stupid” and that she regretted it and was sorry. The alleged victim was initially skeptical but admitted that he was still afraid of the accused. At the same time, she is not interested in punishing her counterpart. After some hesitation, she agreed to the out-of-court conversation.
It is important that both learn something from the incident, emphasized the prosecutor. Something like this shouldn't happen again. “That was not a shining moment,” concluded Judge König and initially suspended the criminal proceedings for six months. The conversation should take place during this period. If it provides clarification, leave it at that. Otherwise, the incident must be heard again in the district court. (ls)
For A recent case in which two former judicial employees appeared in court also caused a stir stood.
