Case 19
| Case Number | 19 |
| Charge | Theft |
| Defense Attorney Present | Yes |
| Interpreter Present | Yes |
| Racialized Person | Yes |
| Outcome | Prison |
After being jailed for over six weeks in pretrial detention for theft, a young man is punished with an additional six months in prison. The judge, prosecutor, and even his attorney emphasize that they hope the harsh sentence pushes him to move back to his former country of residence.
In this case, we see criminalization as a deportation mechanism. The court is uncharacteristically transparent about using harsh criminal sentencing as a tool for enforcing borders and pushing migrantized people it deems unwanted out of Germany. The sentence is much harsher than in many other cases of low-level theft we have seen, which rarely result in prison sentences, especially without probation. We also observe the harsh reality that while the defendant’s labor is severely exploited while in prison (people in prison earn well below the minimum wage), not having the right to work outside of prison makes his financial situation especially precarious. His experience with the criminal legal system and incarceration is shaped and driven by his migration status.
The defendant is a young man who has been in Germany for a few years and previously migrated to a different European country, where he obtained two work qualifications and has family. In Germany, he is not permitted to work because of his migration status (except while in prison) and does not receive social benefits.
He is accused of stealing clothing, valued at less than €100. Store security stopped him on the day in question and he returned the goods to the store, where they were put back on the shelf. At trial, the defendant admits to stealing the items and so the question is what his sentence will be.
The defense attorney adds background information, including that his client is not allowed to work in Germany. This case is his third theft charge, the last of which he spent time in prison for. In prison, he had earned a small income, but he explains that he soon ran out of money after his release.
The judge asks what the defendant intended to do with the stolen clothes. The man replies that he did not have anything to eat and that his clothes were dirty, to which the judge responds that he should have saved money while in prison and jokes that one cannot eat clothes.
In his plea, the prosecutor asks for a six-month prison sentence and that the defendant be released from pretrial detention. He says the man should reconsider living in Germany and can use the time before this prison sentence starts to consider going back to his former country of residence. The defense attorney also says that his client is qualified to find work elsewhere, but that he does not see a future for him in Germany. He requests a four-month prison sentence.
The judge sentences the man to six months in prison. He encourages him to consider whether he would be better off in his former country, and hopes that he decides this would be better than being incarcerated in Germany.
Cases from our archive
Case 34
A man faces trial for stealing a small quantity of food and alcohol. In cases involving substance use (including alcohol and other drugs), courts often want to hear that people facing trial have stopped using substances, are working, or otherwise trying to fit into society. While the defendant ticks all these boxes, and the judge seemingly acknowledges punishment will be counterproductive, she sentences him to a high fine anyway, ending by saying, “Those are the consequences of committing a crime. You should have thought of that at the time.”
Case 33
A man with precarious residence status and problems related to drug use is convicted of shoplifting items valued under €40. The court imposes a fine of almost €2,000 for theft with a weapon. Despite the judge’s hesitation about whether there actually was a weapon involved, she goes along with the prosecution’s recommended sentence, with serious financial implications and possible migration consequences for the defendant.
Case 32
After spending three nights in pretrial detention, a man faces accelerated proceedings on theft charges for stealing goods valued at about €50. He is sentenced to seven months prison as the prosecutor and judge see his repeated theft offenses as evidence not of his life challenges but rather the need for a harsh sentence. Joined by the person’s attorney, all seem to believe the best place for treatment is in prison.
Case 31
A young man who was unhoused and jailed pretrial is sentenced to pay €750 in fines for theft of food, toiletries, and other small items. Although the court acknowledged that he is experiencing problems related to drug use and poverty, the judge finds that the defendant should have simply “said no” to drugs. The sentence came with a warning that any future offense would lead to incarceration.
Perspectives
Criminalized: The Anti-Migration Debate Fuels and Legitimizes Systemic Racism
Anthony Obst, Justice Collective
Fueled by media coverage of isolated violent incidents, a troubling consensus has emerged that presents increasingly severe law-and-order measures as the only solution to perceived insecurity supposedly caused by immigration. This obscures the violent realities of racist criminalization.
Refugees in Germany: The omnipresent border regime
Britta Rabe, Grundrechtekomitee
Even after surviving perilous journeys to reach the EU – which can include pushbacks, beatings, and torture – refugees face an exclusionary system within Fortress Europe that makes their arrival difficult or even impossible. The EU border regime extends all the way into Germany, permeating society invisibly yet tangibly for those who are excluded.