Sacrificed on the Altar of an Ever-Increasing Political Correctness

The following report from Junge Freiheit TV describes the way multiculti laws on the use of DNA evidence prevent the solution of cases in which victims are raped and murdered.

In an interview the ever-outspoken Rainer Wendt, the head of the German police union, weighs in on the degree to which police are hobbled by politically correct laws in their investigation of crimes.

Many thanks to Nash Montana for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


0:01   Freiburg in Preisgau. The basically very idyllic
0:04   university town is in turmoil.
0:07   Multiple serious violent crimes have
0:10   just recently been committed,
0:13   among them two rapes/murders
0:16   which seem very similar to one another,
0:19   one in Freiburg and one in Endingen 30 kilometers away.
0:22   Is it possible a serial killer is at work here?
0:25   The police are still in the dark,
0:28   despite finding traces of DNA in one of the two cases,
0:31   possibly belonging to the offender, but they are not able
0:34   to fully analyze these traces, based on a law
0:37   that is supposedly meant to protect privacy,
0:40   but in reality it mostly protects offenders.
0:44   JF-TV (Junge Freiheit TV) in an interview with the chief
0:47   of the German Police Union, Rainer Wendt.
0:50   “Deadly Correctness”
0:57   On Sunday October 16th, a jogger found
1:00   the body of the barely 19-year-old student of medicine,
1:03   Maria L., in this spot in the River Dreisam,
1:06   right behind the stadium of the SC Freiburg soccer team.
1:11   In the meantime it’s been determined
1:14   the young woman was on her way home from a student party
1:17   the night of Saturday when she was attacked and sexually abused.
1:21   Her death was caused by drowning.
1:24   On Thursday the November 10th the police then found
1:27   the body of 27-year-old Carolin G., who had been missing
1:30   for days, in a forest near the town of Endingen,
1:33   just about 30 kilometers away from Freiburg.
1:37   She, too, was raped and murdered,
1:40   is there a serial killer at work here in the southwest?
1:44   “Well, there is a close proximity with respect to time and location,
1:47   that is clear, but nonetheless it’s important for us to remain objective
1:50   while we wait for all evidence to be analyzed, which means
1:53   in the case of the 19-year-old woman we have offender DNA,
1:56   and in the other case we are still waiting.
1:59   The trace evidence one will have to just wait
2:02   until we can concretely say
2:05   whether there is a connection or not.”
2:08   Anyhow, the DNA in the case of Maria L., is a trace
2:11   that the Freiburg police are now investigating.
2:14   “These DNA traces are being analyzed for a good DNA strand,
2:17   which means that the identity of a possible offender
2:20   as well as the gender of the offender will be shown.
2:23   Purely theoretically there is of course more information
2:26   that we can read from the DNA traces,
2:29   but we of course will obey the currently applicable law.”
2:33   We are in the Bavarian capital Munich,
2:36   meeting with the leader of the German Police Union, Rainer Wendt,
2:39   who has observed the developments in Freiburg closely.
2:42   He will inform us what the police can do
2:45   with DNA trace evidence and what they can’t.
2:49   “We can compare the discovered DNA evidence
2:52   with our existing data and see if we can in this way
2:55   determine an offender. What we can’t do,
2:58   what the law does not allow us to do,
3:01   is to make further determinations such as age, skin color,
3:04   eye color, hair color. With these additional determinations
3:07   we would be able to limit the range of suspects significantly.”
3:10   The DNA is the carrier of our genetic
3:13   information about a person,
3:16   it is unique with every individual person except with identical twins.
3:19   Every single cell is microscopically small but full of information.
3:31   Just how the trace evidence can be utilized in sexual homicide,
3:34   is regulated by paragraph 81 in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
3:40   It says that only gender and familial affinity may be determined,
3:43   and that the genetic fingerprint may be compared to existing data.
3:48   Data privacy/security are cited as the reason.
3:52   “Data protection is a really unusual argument,
3:55   especially with the mass analysis of DNA
3:58   we sometimes have to intrude into the date of many thousands of people,
4:02   in order to minimize the number of suspects.
4:05   I find this very absurd, and there are so few cases anyway,
4:08   because luckily we do not have many capital crimes like that
4:11   where we do not have any other investigative data,
4:14   and therefore this should be permitted
4:17   and the law should be changed accordingly.”
4:20   But precisely the determination of the ethnicity of a perpetrator
4:23   is currently everything but contemporary.
4:26   The ever-present political correctness
4:29   demands the opposite, namely that the ethnicity
4:32   of perpetrators won’t even be mentioned in the media,
4:35   which is diametrically opposed to the goal
4:38   of every police investigation to solve a case.
4:44   Rainer Wendt also doesn’t think much of this argument, because:
4:47   “It should only be an argument for exoneration, because
4:50   if for instance we determine based on DNA evidence
4:53   that the perpetrator is white and has blue eyes,
4:56   then we don’t even have to factor in those that have
4:59   a different skin color and eye color,
5:02   which means our investigation will be more targeted,
5:05   and we will not suspect people who are not suspects.”
5:08   A point of view that at this point
5:11   is anything but widespread in politics.
5:14   “There are widespread parts in the political system
5:17   and it is a basic assumption of the lawmaker
5:20   that citizens have to be protected from the police, and that exactly
5:23   is a mistake, the police and other security authorities
5:26   have to be put in a situation where they can do their job
5:29   with the available possibilities, because the police are here
5:32   to protect the citizen, and the state shouldn’t just
5:35   present itself as artificially dumb, and should use all the resources at its disposal.”
5:40   We are back in Freiburg, where most citizens
5:43   would agree with Wendt if they had any part in the decision.
5:46   “In any case it is more important to find the perpetrator
5:49   and make the data available.”
5:52   “Just catch the guy and punish him and finish,
5:55   this just can’t be, today in Germany you can’t even walk around
5:58   safely anymore, it’s catastrophic.
6:01   You have to be afraid of getting robbed and attacked
6:04   especially as a woman, when you’re alone, in Freiburg and such,
6:07   and you just have to be afraid.”
6:10   And indeed violent crime has risen in Freiburg.
6:13   On September 30th a 13-year-old girl
6:16   was raped by a group of men,
6:19   very close by the place where the body of Maria L. was found.
6:22   On October 10th a father died as a consequence
6:25   of injuries that were inflicted on him near the train station.
6:30   Therefore, together with both previously mentioned cases,
6:33   four severe violent crimes with deadly consequences,
6:36   within the time frame of barely six weeks.
6:39   The population feels anxious and insecure for good reasons.
6:42   “I am all for it that the perpetrators
6:45   are caught as quick as possible, and punished, OK,
6:48   but the problem with us here in Germany is
6:51   what is going to happen to the perpetrator after he’s caught!”
6:55   And that is another sad example for deadly correctness,
6:59   one that not even Rainer Wendt can see anything good coming from.
7:02   “We can’t just make blanket statements;
7:05   there are judges who issue severe verdicts every now and then,
7:08   but many verdicts generate an impact with the public
7:11   that is entirely devastating,
7:14   rapists who get sent home on probation,
7:17   and we’re speaking of offenders who have no clue
7:20   what ‘probation’ is, what this instrument
7:23   of our justice system even means,
7:26   they just feel vindicated and encouraged to commit more crimes.
7:29   Our Constitution tells us it is the duty of every part of the government
7:32   to protect the dignity of the individual person.
7:35   That means that lawmakers have to participate in that and not just the police,
7:38   but especially our judicial system as well has to join in this,
7:41   they can’t just say ‘We’re going to run an aesthetic judiciary,
7:44   and we’ll just leave the protection of the people to the police.’
7:47   No, the judiciary have to participate, and they have to look much harder
7:50   at the impact of their verdicts in the public eye.
7:53   Verdicts that play down the crimes, and laws that protect the perpetrators,
7:57   at the cost of a mostly honest and virtuous citizenry,
8:00   and adding to the aggravation of the police,
8:03   which has to clean up this politically correct mess.
8:06   Unlike the many colleagues who go to crime scenes
8:09   as well as accident scenes, who see the victims,
8:12   and have to speak to their relatives,
8:15   most of these politicians who make all these decisions
8:18   have never had contact with a victim; they have never spoken
8:21   to a raped woman and have never had to inform
8:24   a relative of the death of a loved one. Maybe they should
8:27   do that some day, so that they could learn the devastation
8:30   that their pseudo-liberal laws sometimes cause.”
8:33   Mind you, with our report we drew attention to this judicial grievance,
8:36   one that in the meantime other media outlets
8:39   have reported about as well,.
8:42   But will this lead to the possibility for police in the country
8:45   to make use of all available possibilities in the investigation of severe crimes
8:48   which in other countries have already been approved of and have been in use for years?
8:52   “A lot, of course, depends on the political configurations,
8:55   the coalitions which will come into effect in the next legislative period.
8:59   It would be desirable for our legislative power to adjust to modern capabilities,
9:02   and therefore help in crime prevention and
9:05   facilitate the investigation of perpetrators,
9:08   but unfortunately I fear that a lot will once again be sacrificed
9:11   on the altar of coalition discussions.”
9:14   Not to mention sacrificed on the altar of
9:17   an ever-increasing political correctness.

7 thoughts on “Sacrificed on the Altar of an Ever-Increasing Political Correctness

  1. It seems too crazy for words, and truthfully, I don’t completely understand it. It seems to be saying if the DNA shows the rapist is, say, Moroccan or Somali, if they find an actual suspect matching the DNA, his privacy would be damaged by having announced he was Somali.

    It actually seems more a mechanism to protect the bureaucrats who brought in the invaders than any real legal concept.

  2. The elephant in the discussion was of course the Muslims. Well, Merkel thinks she can ride roughshod over her people. We will have to wait and see how much crap they continue to take from the PC elites. Once everyone knows someone who has lost a loved one to the barbarians, there SHOULD be hell to pay. But who knows whether the Germans have it in them to rise up. They didn’t rise up against Hitler – nor did the majority of Europeans. I suppose that shows that most Europeans are cowards.

    • DiMu, many Europeans fought Hitler before and after his conquests, and you dishonour those who were tortured and killed for their bravery.

  3. Current custom in Sweden is not reveal any details about ethnicity of rape suspects, no details about skin or hair color. Any images handed out to media from surveillance cameras have their faces blurred, often with color tone adjustment (=lightening). No details will be given if they spoke Swedish as natives or not.

  4. Germany’s laws restricting government/police intrusion into “private data” – dating back to fears of Nazi-style monitoring and discrimination – have had some extremely negative consequences over the years.

    Thalidomide – a drug marketed to pregnant women as a cure for morning sickness in the late 1950s, it caused terrible birth defects. The German authorities failed to pick up on the emerging scandal for several years, in part due to their reluctance to maintain an accurate national database of children born handicapped. The Nazi era was still a very recent memory, after all.

    The “Phantom of Heilbronn”, sometimes referred to as the “Frau ohne Gesicht/Woman without a face” was a massive DNA evidence blunder which led to the German police hunting for an apparently female master criminal who was commiting murders in the north, bank robberies in the south, car thefts in the east and dozens of other crimes the length and breadth of the country. Oh, and they thought she was probably a cross dresser, and a traveller or gipsy too. This farce lasted for a decade. The restrictive DNA analysis laws certainly prevented them from realising more quickly the truth : the swabs used to collect samples from all the various crime scenes had all been contaminated with a trace of female DNA years before, probably accidentally by a woman working at the swab factory. It took them over a decade to work this out. Not in Outer Backward-Istan, but in modern, high tech Germany.

Comments are closed.