Revolution in the legal system: Resumption procedure break misjudges!

Revolution in the legal system: Resumption procedure break misjudges!

In the world of judiciary, there are always cases that pause and make us think. Such a topic is the resumption procedure, in which legally binding judgments can be checked. This method opened up the chance to prove their innocence when new facts or evidence come to daylight. WDR explains that the conditions are very closely stuck.

A request for a resumption can only be submitted according to § 359 No. 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) if, for example, new facts or evidence that have not been taken into account in the original judgment is not taken into account. This means that both new evidence and those that the court overlooked at the time can be decisive for the reflection, according to the explanations on [lawyer-wiederschmungfehen.de] (https://www.rechtsanwaltsanwalt-wiederschmungfehen.de/wiederaufmahlverfahrfahrfahrfeiten.de

The challenge of resumption

The hurdles for a successful resumption procedure are high. In fact, only around 3 % of the applications are currently successful - a quota that is significantly worse than that of calls and revisions. Many applicants fail because they cannot present any meaningful new evidence. According to Rechtsanwalt-louis.de, all new evidence from the responsible court must be relevant for the procedure.

A well -known example of such a case is the old story of Maria Rohrbach from Münster. The body of her husband was found in April 1957, and the suspicion quickly fell. It was sentenced to life imprisonment in an indicator process. This impressively shows how malfunctions in the judiciary can also be questioned many years later by new evidence, even in cases that are so long ago.

new evidence in focus

The special thing about resumption is that it is not just about new, very fresh facts. An application can also be successful if aspects or statements by witnesses that have not been taken into account beforehand could lead to another judgment. As Rechtsanwalt-louis.de explains, it is essential that the new evidence actually supports the goal of the application. This requires a precise argument, which often raises the questions why false statements were made beforehand.

The way to justice must therefore be planned well. When new facts come on the table, the dishes are often disagreed with whether they are sufficient for a resumption procedure. So not only the quality of the new facts and evidence is checked, but also the way they flow into the original judgment.

A resumption procedure can not only serve to mitigate a punishment or to achieve an acquisition, but also to prove the innocence of a convict. Such procedures are often observed by society, which is why transparency and fair judgments are becoming increasingly important.