Weighing in two directions for guidance

A research report from t-online could mean that you are in a message verurteilt. The Grundlage voor de Entscheidung is a controversial paragraph.

Two Teilsätze and four Anführungszeichen are, who führen Carsten Janz at the service in a Saal at the Amtsgericht Hamburg-Mitte. These Sätze stehen in einem Text, the investigative journalist on December 11, 2023 at t-online veröffentlichte. Die Überschrift: “Durchsuchung Rechtswidrig – Niederlage für die Staatsanwaltschaft”.

Janz painted it, who the Hamburger Belonged to an Amoklauf at the Zeugen Jehovas with his Toten Räume one of the Sachkundeprüfers through time. Everything that is included in a directed article: this period is a legitimate Grundlage, the thought of which a Straftat liege nicht vor. The t-online-Editor reported on this decision.

The problem for Janz: There is a text in the text that comes from one or more read messages – and is immediately displayed with the anführungszeichen. Paragraph 353d in the Strafgesetzbuch verbietet das. Daraufhin wurde jene Staatsanwaltschaft gegen Janz aktiv, deren Vorgehen there in seinem Text as Rechtwidrig aufdeckte. Die Folge: a penalty for Janz of 3,200 euros.

Janz will do nothing. A service we are of service is aimed at the recommendation of the Hamburg Criminal Law Attorney Gerhard Strate. In the end without success – the court is guilty. The discussion about paragraph 353d has not long started.

The paragraphs have completely disappeared. There is a statement that it is in the Wortlaut of “wesentlichen Teilen” from Behördenakten unter Strafe, when it is not possible to deal in commerce without the Verfahren has not yet ended. Der Paragraf soll unter zijn Persönlichkeitsrechte en Angeklagte in eenem Verfahren voor Vorverurteilung schützen. There are so many Sows and Judges who can help us and dispel the Punishment Process itself. Bei Verstoß drhen Finesen of Finesen of bis zu ainem Jahr.

Criticism on the question of how long it takes, the paragraphs are true. Correct reporting was during the criticism, argumentation of the former Federal Minister of Justice of Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP) in 2007. Journalists would have taken over the content of their activities – now that they did not appear directly in the Anführungszeichen.

Carsten Janz is the “press end light” – and a trap for political instrumental trials against journalists. Speziell in seinem Fall est une change de Staatsanwaltschaft, Druck auszuüben.

Denn: The Behördenleitung itself will have the Ermittlungen angestoßen. The report of the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” is an internal report of the Staatsanwaltschaft. Demnach will first have a high ranking, especially on Janz’s article that hinges. Spicy dabei: Ebenjener Mann war in der Verleidingenheit immer wieder Gegenstand von Janz’ Messages – once you are on the Druck, there is a Disziplinarverfahren who himself is a bit, that is positive for him.

The State Attorney is best informed about the “Correctiv” action, the American state point for the Verfahren that Janz was. A “Weisung” or “Anordnung”, a wrong paint is no longer good.

In the Hamburg local court there is a service from both sides: the journalist, the writer who is so often critical of the reports and the state bank, which is now moving in the right direction.

If the company is the representative of the Staatsanwaltschaft, it is true that Janz vorsätzlich acts by erasing data, but the Verfahren still has no debts. The text will now become clear after four days of the judgment decision.

Comments: Explicit thematic results of the articles in the articles (“Niederlage für die Staatsanwaltschaft”) and the journalists will be punished for their charges. To use the state walt, say that the handwriting contains a legal law. That is so: “Anträge was posited, abgelehnt, Menschen machen ihren Job”.

Verteidiger Strate hinggen argumentierte: Janz has no über a Verfahren message set, the später for Gericht will be treated sei – der Paragraf 353d also sei gar nicht anzuwenden, weil die Gefahr der Vorverurteilung nicht bestehe.

And: Wenn Janz die Passagen “nur a little different, inhaltlich aber identical” forms hätte, “wäre es es nicht vorzuwerfen”. Make sure that the authenticity of the seat is not penalized, but not if there is no inhalation. “I didn’t know, that was my own way,” said Strate.