The Canadian writer warns against a structural witch hunt
After French actress Catherine Deneuve (cf. Instead of #MeToo: For more indecency between women and men), best-selling Canadian author Margaret Atwood has also weighed in on the #MeToo debate. In a text widely circulated on social media today for the coarse Canadian daily The Globe and Mail, she discusses, among other things, the case of former creative writing professor Steven Galloway.
Galloway was dismissed by the University of British Columbia (UBC) on the grounds of mere incriminationallegations dismissed. Before the allegations were revealed to him, he had to sign a confidentiality agreement that prevented him from defending himself against these allegations in the media. Galloway could only do that in court, where after hearing several witnesses it was decided that he did not commit the alleged sexual assaults.
Video of public flogging of woman leads to new exaltation of Taliban’s understanding of law
The exact circumstances are not yet known. But the video that began circulating on news channels yesterday, showing a woman being publicly whipped by a bearded turbantrager, sends an unalterable, absolute message: "Law and order will be enforced here, relentlessly and as it always has been."
According to Western media, for example the New York Times or the British Guardian, the public humiliation and brute punishment happens to a 17-year-old girl who is held down on the floor by two men. She cries and screams. In Pakistan, the video was seen on private television channels and unleashed a wave of outrage. The scandal that the pictures draw is taken seriously.
Criminal law professor Henning Ernst Muller in an interview on the Mollath trial and the high level of prison sentences in Germany
Today begins the new main hearing against Gustl Mollath, who was held in a psychiatric hospital against his will for over 7 years (Mollath case: "If this is true, then this is not a constitutional state, then we have an Archipelago Gulag"). 17 trial days are scheduled for the proceedings before the Regional Court of Regensburg. The Regensburg criminal law professor Henning Ernst Muller has repeatedly discussed and commented on the Mollath case from a legal perspective on the Becks blog. In an interview with Telepolis, Muller explains what exactly the reopened trial is about and what consequences must be drawn from the Mollath case. And it makes clear that the current liability fee of 25 euros per day is far too low. Meanwhile, it became known that Gustl Mollath’s ex-wife exercised her right to refuse to testify and was disinvited as a witness by the court.
Mr. Muller, today is the start of the new main hearing in the Gustl Mollath case. Why did it take so long to get to the new trial?? Henning Ernst Muller: If you mean the time since the order by the OLG Nurnberg: Yes, that took a long time. But one has to take into account that the LG Regensburg is anxious to do everything right now and therefore has planned a very extensive main hearing, with many appointments. This is not easy to fit into a usually very tight judicial schedule. And since Mr. Mollath is at liberty, there is no longer any special legal need for acceleration, as is the case in custody cases. Gustl Mollath at a panel discussion in Munich in early December 2013: "Emport you!". Image: R. Grunhagen What exactly is the trial about now?? Henning Ernst Muller: It is a question of conducting a procedurally and substantively correct main hearing on the same charges as in 2006. What do you think of the fact that the trial has been scheduled for 17 days?? Henning Ernst Muller: As I said before, the court will try to investigate the accusations very carefully this time. Evidence gathering and presentation are obviously to be designed in an open manner. However, it is impossible to predict whether the main hearing will actually take so much time. So you ame that the court will by no means treat the case superficially, as it was amed by one or the other at the beginning? Henning Ernst Muller: Superficiality is no longer an option. The court knows that this time it is under the scrutiny of the nationwide public. This is a special situation – despite the fact that the charges are not too serious "Honor" of the Bavarian judiciary is at stake and also whether Mr. Mollath needs to be exonerated. But it is also clear: Gustl Mollath is the defendant here, not those who put him behind bars at the time – their responsibility is not the program of investigation for this trial. Mr. Mollath has repeatedly emphasized that this is exactly what he wanted: a new main hearing. Which preliminary or. This trial may have disadvantages for Mr. Mollath? Henning Ernst Muller: The advantage is that Mr. Mollath is now well defended, that the main hearing before the Regensburg Regional Court will certainly be conducted in accordance with the rule of law, and that he will possibly be fully rehabilitated from the allegations of the crime and from the allegation that he was acting "delusional" and is "dangerous". In any case, it cannot end worse for him than it did in 2006. However, the result of the hearing of evidence on the allegations of the crime has not yet been determined. However, the main witness for the prosecution and the side plaintiff is exercising her right to refuse to testify. In this way she prevents that her statements are critically questioned in the main trial. In my opinion, the probative value of their earlier statements is thus considerably reduced. The controversial psychiatric reports will also play a role in the trial. What findings do you expect with regard to the widely criticized psychiatric evaluations in the Mollath case? Henning Ernst Muller: I am not a prophet. I hope, however, that the expert opinions will be put to the test and that the errors in the psychiatric evaluation will also be revealed.