Controversial comparison in Fabian murder trial shakes Rostock Regional Court
Defence lawyer Andreas Ohm triggered a scandal on the 28th hearing when he compared the Fabian murder case with the Eiskeller justice scandal. Public prosecutor Nowack speaks of "impudence".
Eiskeller comparison overshadows 28th hearing in Fabian murder case
Rostock – Defence lawyer Andreas Ohm caused a scandal at Rostock Regional Court on 15 September 2026 when he compared the ongoing murder trial in the case of slain Fabian with the notorious Eiskeller justice scandal. According to fr.de, Ohm backtracked immediately after the remark.
It was the 28th hearing in which Gina H. took her place on the defendant's bench. The 30-year-old was subjected to intensive questioning for hours and contradicted herself repeatedly. Shortly before the hearing ended, Ohm responded to an announcement by chief public prosecutor Harald Nowack that he might summon the psychiatric expert at the next hearing. Ohm addressed the presiding judge Holger Schütt: "Let's hope we don't get another Eiskeller case here." Schütt asked for clarification – Ohm immediately withdrew the statement.
The Eiskeller trial is considered one of the most serious judicial scandals in recent German history. A young woman was found dead in October 2022 after a night out at a disco in Aschau in Upper Bavaria. A student spent over 940 days in pre-trial detention until the Federal Court of Justice overturned the verdict in April 2025 – the presiding judge had been secretly communicating with the prosecution. In the second trial, the defendant was acquitted.
Nowack acknowledged in a telephone interview with fr.de that he had not heard Ohm's sentence in the courtroom correctly. "He probably just said something off the top of his head because of how long the trial has been going on," he said. Judge Schütt had subsequently asked him about it again, to which Nowack had replied: "No, not that important." It was only a reporter outside the courtroom who drew his attention to the comparison and explained the Eiskeller background. His verdict afterwards: "It would be impudence if he meant it like that."
Ohm himself also played down the remark. It had been "a spontaneous impulse without much substance" and had "no serious intent behind it." As the only genuine parallel to the Eiskeller case, he cited the fact that the Fabian murder case was also based purely on circumstantial evidence – a murder weapon has never been found.
Beyond the scandal, the 28th day of trial provided plenty of material. Judge Schütt confronted Gina H. repeatedly with inconsistencies: why did she claim she wanted to withdraw money in Güstrow on the day of the crime when bank statements prove she withdrew it much later? Why did she also lie to Fabian's father about her whereabouts? "Much of it turns out to be untrue," Schütt summarised at the end. Fabian's mother Dorina L. turned directly to the defendant in tears: "Why did he have to die?" The court interrupted the outburst. Gina H. insisted: "It wasn't me."
On Thursday, 17 September 2026, the daycare centre manager and a daycare centre worker will be called to testify. Their statements could support or refute whether Fabian was still seen on the day of his disappearance. The psychiatric expert may also present his report on Gina H. The presumption of innocence applies.
Source: Google News LU DE