Controversial approach

Dog crate case: Lower Austria rejects blame

In the view of the victims' representative, the state of Lower Austria did not react "adequately".

(Bild: Anja Richter, zVg, Krone KREATIV)

In the case of a 14-year-old boy who was allegedly locked in a dog crate and tortured by his mother in the Waldviertel region, the state of Lower Austria has rejected the accusations. It emphasized that there was "no lack of care" and that all "legal obligations" had been fulfilled.

The civil action was brought by the victim's lawyer Timo Ruisinger in November of the previous year at the regional court in Krems. The total amount in dispute is 180,000 euros - in addition to 150,000 euros in compensation for pain and suffering, there is also 30,000 euros in declaratory interest for future damages. The lawsuit is legally based on the Lower Austrian Child and Youth Welfare Act, according to which the state is the responsible body for child and youth welfare.

Ruisinger mainly referred to the role of two employees of the Waidhofen a. d. Thaya district authority who were involved in the case. Their actions and omissions were attributable to the state as the provider of child and youth welfare services. "There were numerous indications that the mother of the child was harming the well-being of the plaintiff and that he was suffering physical and psychological damage as a result," the complaint states.

Social worker saw no imminent danger
Following two endangerment reports, the child and youth welfare services made unannounced home visits to the mother and son on October 28 and November 18, 2022 (four days before the boy fell into a coma). Initially, both social workers were on site, but at the second appointment, the lead employee from the Waidhofen a. d. Thaya district authority appeared alone. Although he identified abnormalities, there were no grounds for a so-called danger-in-delay measure.

From the point of view of the victim's representative, the reaction was "inadequate", in particular a personal conversation with the child would have been necessary, it was noted. The employees of the district authority could be accused of "failure".

Out-of-home placement was "not permissible" from the state's point of view
In the letter also addressed to the Krems Regional Court, the legal representation of the state now stated that no damage had been caused by the actions or omissions of the defendant. "The custody obligation and thus the right and duty to care for and raise the child was incumbent on both parents," it emphasized. Interference with parental rights may "only take place under particularly strict conditions", "placement of the minor in an external care facility" is a last resort, so to speak, and "would not have been permissible" under the given circumstances.

The fact that there was no individual interview with the boy was also "professionally and legally unobjectionable". The medical and psychological experts had "never expressed any suspicion that the child's welfare was at risk". The complaint, the dismissal of which was requested, was also described as "inconclusive". "The next steps are that the competent judge at Krems Regional Court will now schedule a hearing," explained victim advocate Ruisinger on Friday.

Criminal investigations against the two social workers
The two social workers mentioned in the complaint - a man and a woman - are being investigated by the public prosecutor's office in Krems. They are suspected of misuse of authority.

The original case itself caused a stir across national borders. The now 34-year-old mother allegedly beat, bound and gagged her son and repeatedly locked him in a dog crate for hours. On November 22, 2022, the child was in an acutely life-threatening condition. The then twelve-year-old survived thanks to the intervention of a social worker who was known to the family through counseling. A friend of the Waldviertel woman at the time is said to have acted as the child's mother's accomplice.

In the jury trial at the end of February 2024, the 34-year-old was sentenced to 20 years in prison for attempted murder, torturing or neglecting minors, young or defenceless persons and deprivation of liberty. Her former girlfriend was sentenced to 14 years for continued violence as a contributing or designated offender. In both cases, placement in a forensic therapeutic center was also ordered. The sentences are now legally binding.