False Extortion Accusations in Vienna: Brothers Acquitted

A jury needed only a few dozen seconds of deliberation for this decision after the alleged victim retracted his incriminating statements on the witness stand.

Allegations were "invented"

He had "invented the allegations himself," the man revealed. The defendants had been in pre-trial detention since November. When confronted by the presiding judge that his false statements had landed the two men, who were employed by the Vienna Social Fund (FSW), in prison, the witness said, "I am sorry for the statement. But it is not true." He had "unfortunately had too much stress" with his boss at that time.

The businessman's superior had noticed that he had accumulated numerous police fines with the company car and had also caused an accident before the vehicle even disappeared. The man then claimed that the defendants had extorted the vehicle from him as "collateral" after he had been under pressure and blackmailed by them for some time. The boss then went with the man to the police, where he embellished his story.

He claimed that on September 13, 2024, the brothers visited him in his office. The older one had put a gun in his mouth, and the younger one had placed a knife against his stomach. Both had demanded the return of 150,000 euros that he owed their deceased father. He was then violently taken to the Lobau, threatened with death, and finally forced to hand over his cash and transfer around 1,000 euros to the defendants' mother. He was continuously pressured and forced to make further transfers until October. When the brothers wanted 9,000 euros in one go, he decided to file a complaint.

Witness in Vienna: "I was not threatened"

"I was not threatened," the incriminating witness now clarified, "I have no problems with the two. I also met them privately afterward." When asked why he had maintained his apparently false statements and not corrected them much earlier, the Chechen claimed that he had been "denied" the opportunity: "Unfortunately, it did not go as I wanted. I am sorry because we are sitting here unnecessarily."

The public prosecutor's office will initiate proceedings against the man for false testimony and defamation. "You will have significant problems," the responsible prosecutor unambiguously announced to the witness.

Defendants released immediately after trial

The acquittals are not final, the prosecutor initially gave no statement. The Chechen brothers were released immediately after the trial. Their current defense attorney, Nikolaus Rast, will join the proceedings against the prosecution witness as a private party and will assert his clients' financial claims in this way. Compensation for detention could also become an issue.

Questionable Role of the Former Defense Attorney

The role of the original defense attorney for the two men, against whom a disciplinary procedure is now pending at the Bar Association, appears to need clarification. The current legal representative of the Chechen brothers only took over the mandate a few weeks ago. His predecessor had not presented exculpatory evidence during the investigation, which was now presented in the main trial and would likely have been suitable to spare the defendants several months of pre-trial detention.

On the one hand, the 23-year-old was able to prove that on the evening of the alleged attack on the prosecution witness in his office, he was at a larger gathering for a barbecue in a cabin near Sankt Pölten. Photos taken around the campfire and discussed in the trial showed that the previously unblemished individual was there from 4:30 PM until after midnight and not at the crime scene in the Wiener Neustadt district.

The 30-year-old, on the other hand, was at a family celebration in Vienna-Margareten until 8:00 PM on September 13, which was also documented with cell phone photos and videos. He then took his cousin home, who arrived in Ottakring at 9:16 PM.

Represented Defendants and Simultaneously Acted as a Trusted Person of the Victim

Curiously, the then legal representative of the two accused had close contact with the alleged victim at the same time. While he was acting as a defense attorney for the detained accused, he accompanied their alleged victim as a trusted person to a police interrogation. The lawyer or an employee also made a tape recording or a transcript with the witness - a classic conflict of interest that a reputable lawyer would not have engaged in.

The judge spoke of "incredible actions" by the former defense attorney. "The role of the colleague and his employee must be scrutinized," demanded Nikolaus Rast, the current legal representative of the brother pair.

(APA/Red)

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.