Stairwell pusher

Trial turned into a storytelling session

(Bild: Dorn Chantall/Dorn / Krone KREATIV)

There were four defendants, two witnesses, six different statements and, in the end, only victims at the trial for a scandal in the stairwell of an apartment building in Vorarlberg. 

The 61-year-old first defendant allegedly pushed the 29-year-old second defendant down the stairs of the apartment building in Muntlix during an argument. Involved in the brawl: her 25-year-old brother and a mother throwing slippers. After police intervention, rescue and charges of attempted or grievous bodily harm, the brawlers met again in court on Tuesday.

Neither the four defendants nor any of their friends even glanced at each other in court. Their wounded pride is too deep-seated, which is why each of the protagonists presents themselves to the judge as a victim, some of them seriously injured. If only there weren't too many inconsistencies. "I am innocent. I didn't hit the woman," said the 61-year-old pusher. He was the one who was attacked by the mob with slippers and a bottle, so to speak, and hit by the second defendant. His wife was also hit on the head by a flying slipper and injured.

"And why was the second defendant lying at the bottom of the stairs?" Judge Christoph Stadler wants to know. "I don't know. When her husband took her to hospital, I thought maybe they were having a marital crisis." The version of the 29-year-old woman who was pushed, who also pleaded not guilty, is completely different. "I only wanted to hit the first defendant in my mind." In addition, her tree-length husband was standing in front of her, which is why she could never have hit the 61-year-old anyway. The fact was that the latter had grabbed her by the shoulders and pushed her down.

The fact that her daughter was lying on the second floor cannot be true. Unless someone carried her back up from the first floor for the photo.

Staatsanwalt im Prozess

"I can't come back now"
"But you describe the situation differently today than you did at the police station. There was nothing about grabbing her by the shoulders and such. What's true now?" the councilor wondered. Whereupon the second defendant, who already has a criminal record, succinctly explains that she only told the officers the short version. The third defendant, who is the mother of the woman who was pushed, described the events in many different ways. Once the daughter tumbled down from the top floor through the stairwell, then again only a short landing on the mezzanine floor and so on. The judge replies: "But then she must have rolled past the neighbor. So I can't follow that now." The Turkish interpreter agrees: "Me neither."

The public prosecutor intervenes: "It can't be that her daughter was lying on the second floor. Unless someone carried her back up from the first floor for the photo." The fourth defendant then sheds some light on the case. He also claims not to have injured anyone and describes the incident more as an eyewitness than as an accomplice. "It's possible that the first defendant grabbed my sister by the shoulders, but when I was standing at the bottom of the landing, she had already fallen down the stairs. It was a fraction of a second." He then called the police.

Will they see each other again in court?
Because the witnesses also failed to shed any light on what had happened, the council acquitted the first defendant of the charge of attempted grievous bodily harm. The second defendant as well as her brother and her mother get off with a diversion and a total fine of 700 euros. The judge's closing words: "The court doesn't believe any of them. Therefore, in the case of the first defendant, an acquittal in case of doubt. But it could well be that one or the other will stand trial again for defamation or giving false evidence."