There he sits now, the giant from 2006, who saved the German national team from the World Cup quarter-finals against Argentina with a brilliant save, and no longer seems to understand the world. Jens Lehmann, former goalkeeper at Borussia Dortmund, Arsenal London and Schalke 04, is going into a match at the Starnberg district court on Friday where he doesn’t know the rules.
The Munich II public prosecutor’s office has charged him with damage to property, insults and fraud. However, the allegations were not true, says his lawyer Christoph Rückel. And Lehmann immediately wants to make known what his opinion is really about. He says to public prosecutor Stefan Kreutzer: “You are only doing this because I am known.”
Of course he denies that. “We have the impression that you are a person who does not want to adhere to the law, but rather ignores it,” replies Kreutzer. “And we don’t like people who want to take the law into their own hands.”
also read
So that’s the tone in the game “Bayern against Jens Lehmann”. The allegations made by the public prosecutor seem to have little to do with the image of a well-financed retired football professional, as one might commonly imagine.
He is said to have accused a policewoman of a “miswiring in the brain”.
The prosecution accuses him of three misdemeanors. On March 10, 2022, the “unemployed football coach,” as he described himself in court, is said to have insulted two police officers. The two came to his house around 9:20 that day and wanted to get his driver’s license. A year earlier, the two officers in Starnberg had caught him talking on his cell phone behind the wheel of his Porsche. Lehmann recognized the two police officers and is said to have called them “liars”. He accused the officer of having a “miswiring in her brain”.
also read
Dangerous body cult
Then, on July 25, 2022, at 11:50 a.m., the 54-year-old is said to have started his chainsaw, went to the neighboring property with the engine running and sawed into a supporting beam of a dormer window on the garage that the neighbor was building. Lehmann is then said to have “cut down a young birch tree” in the garden, according to the public prosecutor. Bad luck for the ex-footballer: A video camera on the house recorded the chainsaw action. Seen on the device: Jens Lehmann.
Jens Lehmann (2nd from left) stands in the courtroom with his lawyer Christoph Rückel (l) before the trial begins
Source: dpa/Sven Hoppe
There is also the alleged bruising of a parking fee at Munich Airport. In January 2021 and August 2022, Lehmann parked his car in parking garage 20 at Munich Airport. On both days, however, he did not pay the fee, but simply drove out in the car – by waiting in front of the barrier until someone drove out and then, according to the indictment, darting out of the parking garage “bumper to bumper” behind the person in front of him. A surveillance camera also recorded this maneuver, which was perfect for a feature film.
Lehmann’s lawyer wants to appease
From the prosecutor’s point of view, the evidence seems to be good. And so Lehmann’s lawyer tried to limit the resulting damage in advance. According to Lehmann, his client had “settled the respective dispute” in all three cases of the prosecution and “everything was settled”.
The former top athlete apologized to the two police officers, paid the parking fees and reached an out-of-court agreement with his neighbor Walter W., said Rückel. Lehmann is also said to have offered the police to appear at a football event at a police sports club with young members. Everything is fine again, that’s supposed to signal that there’s actually nothing left to fix.
also read
But Judge Tanja Walther wants to know what happened. So the defendant can now speak if he wants. And Lehmann wants it.
The claims are not entirely true, he says. He had permission to cut the hedge because Mr. W., at the age of 92, was no longer able to do so. Then Lehmann starts to take a stand: the public prosecutor’s office would wrongly pursue him and make allegations that would not be true. She made his entire tax file public in order to discredit him as a sinner. “Someone has ever asked me: What is worse, murder or character assassination?” he says to the public prosecutor. “I am prejudiced.”
Who wants to trim a hedge with a chainsaw running?
Regarding the airport case, Lehmann explains that his electric Porsche should be charged while he is away. But that didn’t happen. “So I loaded it myself for 45 minutes and drove out. Why should I pay if the car wasn’t charged as agreed?” He doesn’t remember why he used the driver-in-advance trick the second time without paying.
And the encounter with the police officers: “It wasn’t what you said,” said the defendant. “I never said you were liars. I said they lied and because they lied I lost my driver’s license.” He asked for forgiveness for that.
Prosecutor Kreutzer does not want to leave Lehmann’s allegations uncommented. “In principle, the public prosecutor only brings charges if they expect a conviction. I’ll be just as happy if they’re convicted or acquitted.”
“Can I ask you something?” asks Lehmann. “No, now is not the time for a discussion,” says Kreutzer. “What kind of hedge is that you wanted to cut?” “You’ve never been there before?” asks Lehmann, looking as incredulous as if he were auditioning for a role at the theater.
also read
“I have never seen a person trying to trim the hedge with a running chainsaw, hence the question,” replies Kreutzer. “It’s a shame you weren’t there,” says the defendant. “They’re more like small trees that grow next to each other.” “Aha,” says the public prosecutor.
Policewoman: “He was very unfriendly and constantly interrupted me.”
Then witnesses testify: the two police officers and Walter W., the neighbor. The officers Hans Peter M. and Ursula W. drove to Lehmann to take his driver’s license. His wife opened the front door and her husband came down the stairs and said “in a harsh tone” that she should go back in. “Lehmann was quite upset and said we were both cunning liars. He treated us condescendingly, it was not a normal conversation,” said the official.
His colleague adds that the defendant stated that he had “already handed in his driver’s license to our club.” But that wasn’t true; the officials had checked. Ursula W. can still remember the encounter well. “He was very unfriendly and constantly interrupted me,” says the witness. “I have rarely experienced something like that.” And yes: he called her a liar.
“You’re sitting here and doing me harm,” says Lehmann, shaking his head. Next: “Why?”
also read
Then the most important witness in the trial, which is scheduled to last two days, comes into the room, the neighbor. It is Walter W., he is 92 years old, wears a checked jacket and has white hair. When the architect speaks (“for 65 years”), he doesn’t hesitate, he speaks almost ready for printing. And he knows exactly why he’s sitting here. He filed the criminal complaint, which ultimately led to the trial. And he took it back: “We agreed, I have no interest in criminal prosecution,” explains Walter W. when asked by Rückel.
Witness: Chainsaw was unsuitable for cutting the hedge
The question of whether Jens Lehmann sawed into a support beam could be clarified by the video camera recording at Walter W.’s house. The judge shows the film on a flat screen.
Jens Lehmann can be seen running around the building with the chainsaw, shortly afterwards he appears at the top of the picture and the sounds of chainsaws boom outside. “He put the saw on, we don’t know whether he also sawed the beam,” emphasizes Rückel.
Someone also tried to disable the camera on the house beforehand; the power cable was ripped out. However, the device continued to run; it still had a battery for emergency operation. The public prosecutor’s office claims that Lehmann disconnected the cable. Lehmann says it wasn’t him.
“You have to see it with humor,” says Walter W. and laughs. Incidentally, a chainsaw is unsuitable for cutting the hedge, says the witness. “The branches would bend away, they are too light.”
At the end of the day of the hearing, Lehmann said he was happy that he was now able to present his point of view. His lawyer emphasizes again that everything has been settled and taken care of and that there is now no public interest in criminal prosecution.
also read
Incidentally, the Bavarian police turned down the defendant’s offer to hold a “football event” with boys from the police sports club, Judge Walter read out a corresponding letter. The police do not want to expose themselves even remotely to the suspicion of accepting an advantage, so they have to turn down the offer, a government councilor said in the letter.
The verdict is due to come next Friday.
