Case Archive
Every day, people face the injustices of the punishment system. Yet, what happens in court is often kept out of view for those not directly impacted. Over the last two years, Justice Collective – along with activists and community members — has observed over 200 criminal court cases in Germany. We have focused on the most commonly punished offenses (riding the train without a ticket, theft, drug-related offenses, fraud, migration cases, and assault) to get a picture of the day-to-day work of criminal courts. Here you can read documentation of and commentary about the injustices we observed.
Findings
You can explore this case archive by our findings about systemic racism in the criminal legal system, or click on "Findings" above to read more about each finding.
You can read the latest case uploads or use the right navigation to filter for cases by findings, offense type, punishment, and more.
Cases
Case 23
A woman comes to Germany for health treatment, her family collecting thousands of euros to prepay costs and secure a visa. A federal agency accuses her of forging identity documents. Despite the prosecution admitting lack of evidence for intentional deception and requesting acquittal, the court sentences her to a harsh fine, jeopardizing both her stay in Germany and her health.
Case 22
A man is held in pretrial detention for months and sentenced to a fine of several thousand euros for selling cannabis. Although at the time of the trial, the legalization of cannabis consumption and further decriminalization of possession and supply is imminent, the court strongly condemns the defendant's actions. The prosecutor described them as “extremely reprehensible”.
Case 21
The court puts pressure on a man to revoke his appeal of a conviction for resisting arrest and assault of police. Despite the defendant’s distress, the judge appears uninterested in the man’s account of the alleged offense. The outcome–no relief for the defendant–appears predetermined by the judge, prosecutor, and the defendant’s attorney.
Case 20
Three young defendants are summoned to fast-track proceedings (Schnellgericht) for a low-level theft case. Because the court has not lined up an interpreter for one of them, he will not be heard and instead will be sentenced with summary proceedings (Strafbefehl), meaning he will receive his sentence in the mail. After a quick hearing, the other two are each punished with €600 fines.
Case 19
After being jailed for over six weeks in pretrial detention for theft, a young man is punished with an additional six months in prison. The judge, prosecutor, and even his attorney emphasize that they hope the harsh sentence pushes him to move back to his former country of residence.
Case 18
A young woman’s theft case in fast-track court is dismissed, but only on the condition she pays a fine. She says security footage would exonerate her, but the court does not want to extend the proceedings to take evidence and seemingly presumes the woman’s guilt.
Case 17
The court sentences an older woman to a hefty fine for theft from a supermarket. As the court hands down the sentence, court security moves in to arrest the woman. She has an outstanding warrant because of an unpaid fine on a prior case, for which they will take her to prison immediately.
Case 16
A young man is sentenced to insult for statements during a police control. The court does not take into account the man’s apology or experience of the control as discriminatory. He is threatened with a harsher sentence and so accepts the high fine he had appealed.
Case 15
In quick proceedings of about ten minutes, the court dismisses administrative charges brought against a young man after a traffic dispute in which the other party, a plainclothes police officer, had abused his authority.
Case 14
A young racialized man has spent over a month in pretrial detention. He is sentenced to a year and a half in prison, without probation, for six counts of theft. Playing a role in the proceedings was that he had been repeatedly stopped by police at a so-called “crime hotspot” (kriminalitätbelastete Orte). While some resulting cases against him were dropped, they added to the court’s perception of the defendant as having “criminal energy”.
Case 13
A man appeals a fine that was imposed on him because two police officers claim to have seen him holding a phone in his hand while driving. The officers have no recollection of the specific event, but the judge affirms the fine based on their statements. The defendant faces additional costs of around €300 as a result of the appeal to the fine on top of the €100 fine.
Case 12
A man is sentenced to a €1,800 fine for multiple counts of fare evasion. He has no lawyer and seems to fear that he will be sent to prison after the trial.
Case 11
With the help of strong defense counsel, a man’s charges for possession of very small quantities of cannabis are dropped. Why he was criminalized for such a small amount – given Berlin’s guidelines not to pursue such cases and impending legalization of possession of much higher quantities – is not discussed, nor any racial profiling that may have preceded his arrest.
Case 10
In a trial lasting five minutes, a couple, relatively new to Germany and seeking asylum, are sentenced to a €200 fine for theft of about €30 of food items.
Case 9
A man is fined for insulting a job center employee over the phone. Throughout the trial, the court is impatient with the defendant, urging him to be compliant with the job center and refusing to see why someone relying on social benefits might get frustrated with this institution.
Case 8
For stealing around €100 worth of clothes and groceries from a supermarket, a young woman is sentenced to three months in prison (on two years of probation) and 80 hours of unpaid work. During the trial, the judge acts hostile towards her and accuses her of asylum and social benefit fraud.
Case 7
In this case, a young man still paying off past fines is sentenced to pay €600 for theft of a sandwich and some chocolate. While the court nods to the fact that he likely committed the offense because he does not have money, in the end the judge says theft is “not a solution”.
Case 6
A young woman is sentenced to nine months prison on probation for multiple counts of theft. Her disinterested lawyer barely makes a case for her and does not shed light on the details of her precarious employment status, which provides a crucial backdrop in this case, but in the end does not move the court anyway.
Case 5
A man is sentenced to 140 days of punishment at a rate of €15 each, for theft of food worth under €5. As a Bürgergeld recipient, €15/day is almost his entire daily income. The judge considers the harsh sentence to be necessary because the defendant had committed past offenses.
Case 4
A young woman is sentenced to three years on probation for three counts of fare evasion. If she is caught without a train ticket again she faces multiple months in prison and likely loses her precarious job.
Case 3
A young migrantized man is held in pretrial detention for four months and is ultimately convicted, based on his confession, of stealing a pack of cigarettes and a lighter. The judge sentences him to time served, apparently avoiding paying him reparations for his lengthy pretrial detention.
Case 2
A young woman admits to having stolen a bag full of groceries and offers her apologies. Yet, the judge imposes a high fine, threatening the woman with prison in case she is convicted of another offense.
Case 1
In this case, a woman with unclear residency and work permit status is tried in an accelerated procedure for three counts of fare evasion. Despite her financial hardship and lack of legal representation, the court imposes a hefty fine. The woman is subjected to repeated questioning about why she came to and resides in Germany, legally irrelevant to decide the case at hand.
Filters
Findings
Charge
Punishment