Where I Can Stream Full Bangbros Movie

penalty for tax evasion amounting




Anusinspektion the Accountants

26th February 2009 A study in the intimate area with detainees is constitutional only if concrete suspicions, notify the Federal Constitutional Court in the press release Press release No 16/2009 of 26 February 2009:

The complainant, an accountant, was in the morning at seven clock when he took his children to school, on suspicion of bribery and embezzlement to the detriment of professional supply plant arrested for lawyers and taken into custody. According to him, he had to leave at admission Stripping in the custody and examined by prison officials in the genital area (Anusinspektion). Opposition and remained here to request a court decision without success. The Hanseatic Higher Regional Court considered that the measure is legitimate. The general arrangement, incorporating new prisoners to be investigated accordingly, to preserve the order of the correctional facility (§ 119 para 3 CCP) have been necessary, namely to prevent diversion of drugs, money or other prohibited items were smuggled in or on the body hidden. While the subsequent constitutional complaint was successful. The 3rd Chamber of the Second Court noted that the right of the complainant was injured:
is this the Court of Appeal but assumed that the introduction of drugs and other prohibited items into prisons a serious threat to the discipline of that institution represents. It has neither the specific weight in the present case affects fundamental legal concerns nor the specific restrictions sufficiently taken into account, the result for the admissibility of invasive measures in the enforcement of custody from the general-clause-like nature of the engagement authorization of § 119 para 3 Code of Criminal Procedure, and the specificity of custody.
interventions that affect the genital area and the shame of the detainee, can not be avoided in principle in law enforcement custody. The prisoner in that regard but is entitled to special consideration. The fact that administrative procedures are easier without eingriffsvermeidende considerations have, here is even less suitable as in other less sensitive areas to justify the waiver of such considerations. This is in tougher measures for intervention during investigation that will be imposed on the basis of mere suspicion.

By the Higher Regional Court by the complainant in the circumstances of the case has not appreciated, but is considered the measure in question is at the commencement of detention and independently admissible on the circumstances of the case, it has the moral rights of the complainant (Art. 2 para 1 in conjunction with Article 1 paragraph 1 GG) is not sufficiently taken into account. In addition, the court also possible to be lenient as the embodiment of the procedure commonly practiced, according to the judicial authority, not the shame less intensive contact with the implementation of any inspection of body cavities by a doctor or health care professional being considered.
Federal Constitutional Court, decision of 4 February 2009 2 BvR 455/08

It's not believed, if one has not witnessed or reported serious source gets. An accountant who brings his children to school, and the offense is a fortune to load sets provides for the detention center is the same dangers as a drug courier on the way to "work", where you trade with Accused of narcotics.

heard somewhere on it. It's just unfortunate that this has to pour only the Federal Constitutional Court in a decision, and the prison management something not even aware of it.