Case of Gäfgen v. Germany

Application No. 22978/05 (2010)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Case of Gäfgen v. Germany

European Court of Human Rights
Application No. 22978/05 (2010)

Facts

In September 2002, Magnus Gäfgen (defendant) lured a child, J, into his apartment in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Gäfgen suffocated J and hid his body under a jetty. After Gäfgen sent J’s parents a ransom note, the police arrested Gäfgen when he collected the ransom. A police officer, M, informed Gäfgen about his right to remain silent and his right to consult a lawyer. In October 2002, Gäfgen underwent a police interrogation about the whereabouts of J. After speaking with his lawyer, Gäfgen told the police J was hidden by a lake. After a break in the interrogation, deputy police chief D ordered police officer E to threaten Gäfgen with physical pain to force Gäfgen to reveal J’s location. E complied with D’s order, threatening Gäfgen with physical harm if he did not reveal J’s location. Gäfgen asserted that E also physically assaulted him, which the German government (plaintiff) disputed. Gäfgen then disclosed the whereabouts of J’s body. After police found the body, Gäfgen confessed to M about the kidnapping and murder of J. In April 2003, Gäfgen sought to discontinue his trial for the kidnapping and murder of J on the basis of the interrogation conducted by D and E. Gäfgen argued that the interrogation had breached his rights under Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the convention). In July 2003, the regional court convicted Gäfgen of kidnapping and murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The regional court based the verdict on a confession Gäfgen had made during trial related to the planning and commission of the crime. The Germany Federal Constitutional Court upheld the regional court on appeal. In June 2005, Gäfgen filed an application under Article 3 of the convention, arguing that the interrogation by E violated his right to be free from torture.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership