Zurich police officer acquitted on excessive force allegation
A city police officer faced disciplinary abuse charges before Zurich District Court and was acquitted. Too many inconsistencies in witness testimony.
Acquittal for city police officer in excessive force allegation in cell block
A Zurich city police officer was acquitted by Zurich District Court on Wednesday. He had been accused of using excessive force against a man of Algerian origin during prisoner transport in October 2023. According to the NZZ, the verdict was rendered on the principle of "in dubio pro reo" – owing to substantial, insurmountable doubt regarding the alleged facts.
The officer, whom the NZZ refers to under the changed name Stefan Müller, had received orders on a Sunday morning in October 2023 to transport an Algerian who had been arrested during the night from the police station at Bahnhofquai to the detention wing of the criminal police in district 5. Müller told the court that the transport itself had proceeded without problems. In district 5, the highly intoxicated detainee had been uncooperative, but Müller vehemently denied the allegations of violence made against him. He works "cleanly" – also on that autumn Sunday.
Securitas employee reported incident internally
A few days after the transport, a Securitas employee who had been on duty in district 5 at the same time filed a report via the internal feedback system. She described how a police officer had pressed a prisoner against the wall on the way from the waiting room to the cell block, slammed his head against the wall, and struck him several times on the back of the head with his own shoe. In the cell, the man in handcuffs had also been kicked in the knees and knocked to the ground. The woman named no names. Video recordings of the time in question had already been overwritten by then.
The public prosecutor subsequently brought charges of disciplinary abuse and sought a conditional fine of 19,800 francs and a penalty of 4,000 francs. According to the public prosecutor, no charges were brought regarding assault because the alleged victim had not filed a complaint.
Confusion of two similar cases
Müller's defence counsel argued in court that two transports had taken place on the identical route that Sunday morning. In both cases, the arrested men were of Algerian origin and similar in age. The security employee had filed a supplementary report a few days after her initial notification, naming the man who had been accompanied by Müller. The internal investigators then focused exclusively on Müller and the detainee assigned to him – and dropped the second case, which had initially also been investigated.
The defence proved that the investigation had followed the wrong trail with several concrete pieces of evidence. The interview report of the Algerian whom Müller had transported showed: the man complained about being cold when asked about his condition, not about pain. When asked further, he merely mentioned red spots on his skin, for which he had already seen a doctor. An emergency doctor called in on the same day noted in the report that he had found no signs of violence – but did find a skin rash.
Furthermore, the witness's time specifications deviated from the actual course of Müller's transport. Her description of the officer himself also did not match: Müller was significantly taller than she had described and had never been bald or had short hair, testified former superiors. Finally, the woman had described a marked police vehicle, while Müller had carried out the transport in a neutral vehicle.
In the case of the second Algerian – who, from the defence's perspective, was the actual victim – the initial interview had not been possible because he had been lying on the floor screaming and had requested a doctor. The defence concluded from this that the security employee must have mixed elements of both cases in her reports and subsequent interviews. She had presumably "not deliberately lied," but her statements had resulted in "a police officer who did nothing wrong standing before the court today."
Judge sees insurmountable doubt
The judge followed this line of argument. There were "substantial, insurmountable doubts" that the facts had occurred as presented by the prosecution. The witness testimony had contained too many inconsistencies. Stefan Müller was acquitted and compensated for his court costs. He remains in service.
The verdict of Zurich District Court (GG 260 140 from 2 September) is not yet final.
Source: NZZ