During a trial in Germany last May, Hazel Behan, a native of Co Westmeath, endured an intense two-day ordeal in court during which she was subject to 10 gruelling hours of interrogation. Christian Brückner, the man alleged to have sexually assaulted her, was present in the courtroom, clad in a dishevelled blue linen jacket, not uttering a word and showing no emotion. The crime he stood accused of was the brutal sexual assault of Behan in her Portuguese residence in June 2004 where she was a holiday rep.
Brückner was pronounced not guilty on Tuesday but this decision is not conclusive for the case. The prosecutor intends to challenge the verdict, following a contentious trial. In a rare assertion for German court proceedings, chief prosecutor Ute Lindemann expressed the belief that the court was overly scrutinising the witnesses- a sentiment echoed by long-standing court observers in Braunschweig.
Presiding judge Uta Engemann came under fire from many in May for her perceived coldness and lack of empathy towards Behan. Her inquisitive stance concerning content and tone evoked shock from the court attendees.
Despite the protracted examination communicated through a translator, Behan kept her poise as she was quizzed on personal matters ranging from her character to her personal relationships and intimate life. Near the closing of the two-day session, Atilla Aykac, Brückner’s defence lawyer, queried why Behan decided not to opt for closed court proceedings. Behan responded resolutely, stating her willingness to have her testimony heard in public.
Throughout the trial, Brückner’s all-male defence squad frequently obstructed the female judge and prosecutor, often belittling and speaking over them. Prosecutor Lindemann was accused by Friedrich Fülscher, in his closing argument, of being unable to maintain “emotional distance” from the case.
Fülscher, the defendant, directly contacted Behan in 2020, seeking the case file while concurrently insisting upon his client’s innocence – a move that was not questioned by the judge. This unusual act, as Behan, the defence lawyer, perceived it, was even noted by senior court officials as being “borderline.”
Judge Engemann’s ruling overlooked these details, instead choosing to concentrate on her perception of internal and external courtroom critics, particularly the media and prosecution. Engemann attributed the defendant’s notoriety to his connection with the Madeleine McCann case, which she stated led to “significant auto-suggestion.”
Despite acknowledging that this verdict may not sit well with victims, Engemann concluded there was inadequate evidence for a conviction. She emphasised that media portrayal of an individual as a “sexual deviant” can interfere with witness credibility and render court testimonies practically useless.