Case 7
| Case Number | 7 |
| Charge | Theft |
| Defense Attorney Present | No |
| Interpreter Present | No |
| Racialized Person | No |
| Outcome | Fine |
In this case, a young man still paying off past fines is sentenced to pay €600 for theft of a sandwich and some chocolate. While the court nods to the fact that he likely committed the offense because he does not have money, in the end the judge says theft is “not a solution”.
While the punishment system affects migrantized and racialized people especially, it systematically targets all those affected by poverty more broadly. In this case, a white German man is punished for not having enough money to pay for food. Even though the judge acknowledges that this is the reason for the theft, the system insists that the man must be punished. There is a cruel irony in the judge suggesting that theft is not a solution: What solution does punishment provide for people being unable to afford basic necessities? This next fine will increase the defendant’s monthly payments to almost half of his monthly income. This also increases the likelihood of him having to rely on theft as a survival strategy, and of him being jailed for not being able to pay (Ersatzfreiheitsstrafe).
At the same time, though the person is punished harshly, we did notice some ways in which this person, as a white German, was treated differently–indeed a bit favorably–as compared to cases against racialized and migrantized people. For example, we almost never see the court apply €10 per day of punishment, even for people who have incomes lower than Bürgergeld, such as asylum seekers. According to the law, fines should be calibrated to people’s financial circumstances but are generally too high for low-income people, with the court usually assessing €15/day for people receiving Bürgergeld, or almost their entire daily income. In this case, the court went down to €10. The judge noting that a lack of money probably played a role in the theft is also more understanding than most defendants can expect.
The trial is over within minutes, with the judge asking the defendant (who does not have an attorney) a few quick questions about the theft of a sandwich and some chocolate from a supermarket.
The defendant adds that he is already paying fines on three past offenses, in installments that take up 40% of his Bürgergeld income.
The judge confirms the prosecutor’s suggested sentence of a fine of €600 (60 days at €10/day), explaining that the theft was “a dumb thing” and that though the defendant did not have money, theft was not a solution. She adds that his past offenses–the ones he still owes fines on–are weighed in the sentencing.
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.
