Egyptian woman stabbed 18X inside German court room

Zees displays a total lack of dizipline! Zeir markzmanship skills are zub-par! Ziss vill not do! Ve muzt haff better zecurity in ze courtrooms! Jawohl!

Am I mistaken in my assumption that the perp was in fact Russian & not German? I'm surprised the Germans aren't furiously pointing that fact out to deflect a little blame from themselves.

And once again, the game of "Germany or Florida" continues.

Someone get Jan in here as he's CHUD's German Legal analyst.

I don't think this is so much a legal issue as a social or logistical one. I guess, having been untouched themselves to the best of my recollection by terrorist acts since 9/11 (although you'd think the goings on in Spain & England would have tipped them to the need for greater security in all things, including courtrooms). I know here in the US, I used to be able to get into courthouses by just flashing my attorney's ID, bypassing the metal detectors the general public had to use. BUt after 9/11, that shit went the way of the dodo, and now we all have to empty our pockets and remove belts and the whole 9, just like everyone else, & have since 01. I have to imagine it's much the same in England or other countries that have actually had terrorist attacks (or the threat thereof) take place on their soil. Am I correct in this? Maybe a UK Chewer can help me out here? And if I am correct, and increased courtroom security is the norm elsewhere in Europe, why the hell wasn't Germany following suit?

2 WTF here. How did that Russian slipped a knife in there post 9/11, and how the fuck could he stab her 18 fucking times without being stopped?

THAT, and how in the hell did the cop mistake her husband as the attacker? I'm assuming that he was inside the courtroom to witness the proceedings (it sounds like it all happened really quickly), so he HAD to have seen what happened. Shooting the husband by mistake (instead of the ACCUSED MOTHERFUCKER who strode accross the courtroom to attack her) is pure incompetence.

Some things to consider here:

In Germany the courts operate under the premise of "open courts", meaning the public shall have access to all proceedings before the court, unless it touches concerns of national security or the risk of harm for minors is evident (as in cases of sexual abuse and such). The reason behind this is historical. Third Reich again. So you will not have secret court rulings again.

And bear in mind that 9/11 did not kick off the "craze" (for lack of a better term) of security measures like in the states. Though we haven´t had a direct attack on German soil by terrorists afterwards we have had enough attacks on German soldiers and civilians abroad to be concerned about this issue. However this does not lead to shield of all public buildings. And to add to this, there is no European legislation regarding this issue since it is purely a matter of national law under the present construction of the EU-treaty.

The concrete situation in German courts in everyday buisness does not call for security gates at all. Unless there is a high profile case or other security concerns that validate the use of a security gate. Basicly you can walk in into every court fully armed without the fear of being searched.
Even in the courtroom itself there is no cop present normally if it concerns profane cases like this one that is about insult first and foremost.

So there is the reason why the guy could get a knife into the court without problems and stab her 18 times without interruption. Therefore I guess the cop came rushed in in the middle of the bloodbath and mistook the husband for the attacker.

This is not an isolated incident actually. We had a real shootout in a court proceeding that was concerned with a heritage proceeding just a month ago.

And regarding the difference in perspective I don´t think that this is about religion but security concerns indeed. There is nothing involved that does elevate the hate of that one Russian guy (and I don´t know if the killing stems from hate against islam or merely because he was batshit crazy.) to the level that concerns a basic social problem.

I hope that could clarify one or two WTF´s.

He shot the husband trying to rescue his own wife, you wouldn't believe this crap if it was in a movie. What a complete moron. But one can see that many might reasonably assume a racial motive behind that reaction.

If you would have read what I have written above I guess the term moron is a bit harsh for somebody who is not a cop but rather a regular security guy that rushes into a bloodbath without knowing whats going on.

Thanks for providing us with some context, Jan. That still doesn't explain the incompetence of the cop shooting the wrong guy. Then again, it's easy to arm-chair quarterback the situation with incomplete facts.

Just to clarify that too:

I am pretty sure that guy was not a regular cop. They don´t do security service at the regular courts (unless something like the supreme court and such).
These guys are basicly better paid security guards at a mall. I am pretty sure he encountered a situation that was way above his qualification and his skills and while trying to do the right thing that went horribly wrong.
So i´d rather summarize that under problems like understaffing and lack of proper money, because that is what it ultimately boils down to, than this one individual.
And sorry to Cap for coming of a bit snarky above without providing proper context.

Even if they'd had metal detectors and a normal pat-down from usually untrained security guards it wouldn't have been too far fetched to be able to get a graphite knife or something similar in.

Jan, from what you're saying it sounds like security in the form of a bailiff or something similar doesn't exist in every court room there? If security only arrived to see a bloodbath I'd guess there's nobody there normally?

Pretty much. In every day proceeedings that flood the courts, like this one about insult or some civil law case about a few hundred Euros or such, that are basicly just numbers for the court there is basicly no security at all. Neither in the court room itself nor on the floor. Normaly you have a few guys sitting at their desk at the entry and that´s about it. Unless you have cases that could be considered a danger for the participants or even the public.

Then again, thanks to our federalistic system, the organisation of the courts in terms of security differ from state to state, so take what I am saying with a grain of salt.

The husband getting shot makes sense considering that -- a cop runs into the court room having heard a witness has been attacked, sees someone running towards that witness, shoots first and asks questions later.

Also, in germany we got extremely low possession of arms among the populace. We also got significantly less armed (as in, firearms) security personnel, and usually not a lot of real life practice with firearms on our police and security... we are just not a firearms country basically.
This means nobody really expects, or frequently deals with cases such as this. Most cops never ever fire even a warning shot in their entire career, most security personnel who are licensed to carry a firearm (which arent all) are usually years away from their last military or police occupation.

Whether or not there was a racist motive, you have to see that in neither case german values or prejudice was involved... this is a russian guy stabbing an egypt girl, doesnt have much to do with whatever cases of racism exist in germany.

That being said, my uncle is a lawyer in Frankfurt, one of the largest cities with a pretty sizeable ghetto-ish part of town. One of the few true No-Go areas in germany. He is often working to defend the rights of underprivileged as part of a nonprofit organization, and thus has to deal with a lot of cases that stem from cultural conflict or just plain clashes of german law with foreign tradition.

In one such cases, an iranian husband angrily stormed into a court session with a saber (a collector piece he owned) and tried to attack the attorney for some reason of honour. He was stopped by other people in the room, but not before nearly hacking off the hand of a colleague of my uncle.

That was years ago, and I had a few conversations regarding court security with him, but even he admitted these cases are so few and far in between, and often could easily be done just outside the courtroom if there were guards, its not really reasonable to spend the money and effort.

Its a bit like people getting hit by a falling tree during the very rare storms in germany (usually once per year that actually uproots trees, if that), sure you can go and cut off most trees in towns to maybe save the one unlucky guy every 5 years to get hit by one, but it really doesnt make much sense.

Yeah, but this was a courthouse. You'd think if any public buildings should have security, it would be them. Unless the trial was held right out in the town platz?
All the more reason to be concerned about security IMO.

I guess we havbe a bit of a different approach to what constitutes the need for security measures. I think Franklin said it best:

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

Security in a courthouse hardly infringes on personal liberty in the manner Franklin was talking about.

No shit. But it does make for a great shift in terms of public access and in terms of general cultural approach towards security issues.
Since I work in court rather frequently I am perfectly fine with the way security is handled there and would actually be a bit concerned turning courts into a high security building for cases like this.

ETA: Just to clarify - I get Darkmites point. But I am always wary if incidents like this lead to cries (not that I concluded that from Darkmites post) for amping up the security standard, when it is more likely that you get stabbed or shot while waiting for the bus than getting shot or stabbed at a courthouse statistically. Yet noone advocates police surveillance of a bus station. With the Franklin quote I was merely trying to point out the slippery slope to which such incidents can lead.

I still don't buy that. Emotions are at fever pitch where litigation - especially litigation concerning dignatory torts like "insult" are concerned - and it isn't much of a leap to see a possible need for protection against violence in places like that. It's also a minimal invasion of privacy or personal liberty to have a bailiff present in every coirtroom, or even to get subjected to metal detector screenings on entering this, a government building, on ostensibly government related business. IMO, the slippery slope starts a little ways further on. BTW, as pointed out in another thread, Germany outlaws public speech at all related to the Nazi party or eugenics. Not that it's a worthy one, but that seems like a more stringent infringement on a right/freedom than a metal detector search or police/security presence in court to me.

I agree it just plain stupid not having trained bailiffs. I am anti government as most anyone, but I can't see how having bailiffs is anti freedom. It just make since having train security in any place as emotional as a courtroom.