Aggravated extortion

Aggravated extortion pursuant to § 145 of the Criminal Code exists if extortion is committed under particularly serious circumstances. A prerequisite is that a person coerces another through violence or dangerous threats into an action, toleration, or omission that causes financial damage, and in doing so acts intentionally to unlawfully enrich themselves or a third party. The perpetrator does not take the item themselves, but forces conduct that is detrimental to the victim’s assets.

The injustice of aggravated extortion lies in the fact that exceptionally drastic means of coercion are used, or the act achieves an increased intensity, duration, or dangerousness. This includes, in particular, threats of death, severe mutilation, kidnapping, arson, explosives, or the destruction of economic or social existence. Cases of commercial, ongoing extortion or those with extreme consequences, such as a suicide attempt, are treated equally.

objective elements of the offence

The objective element of the offense covers exclusively the externally perceptible events. The decisive factors are actions, means used, and consequences that have occurred. Internal processes such as motives or intent are disregarded.

The aggravated extortion requires that all the characteristics of simple extortion are initially met. The perpetrator acts on a person through violence or dangerous threats and coerces them into an action, toleration, or omission that causes financial damage to the victim or a third party. The perpetrator does not access an item themselves, but forces conduct that is detrimental to the victim’s assets.

The financial damage occurs because the victim gives in to the coercion. The crucial point is that the disadvantage is brought about indirectly through the victim’s behavior and that no appropriation by one’s own hand takes place.

Violence exists if physical coercion is exerted or directly aims to break the victim’s resistance. A dangerous threat exists if a significant disadvantage is held out, which is capable of arousing serious fear. The coercive effect must be functionally linked to the financial damage.

The objective element of the offense is fulfilled as soon as a financial loss occurs as a result of the forced behavior.

Qualifying circumstances

Aggravated extortion only exists if at least one statutory element of qualification is additionally realized.

This is particularly the case with threats of death, significant mutilation or disfigurement, kidnapping, arson, endangerment by nuclear energy, radiation or explosives or with the destruction of economic existence or social standing. The extraordinary intensity of the coercive effect is decisive.

The act is also qualified if the perpetrator puts the victim in a agonizing state for a prolonged period of time, i.e. creates continued anxiety or psychological distress through continuous or repeated coercion.

A qualification also exists in the case of commercial commission, in the case of prolonged continuation against the same person or if the act causally causes a suicide or attempted suicide of the coerced person or a person affected by the threat.

Steps of legal assessment

Perpetrator:

The subject of the crime can be any person who is criminally responsible. No special personal characteristics are required.

Object of the Offense:

The object of the offense is the assets of the coerced person or a third party, which are damaged by the forced behavior.

Act:

The act consists of a person being forced by violence or by particularly serious dangerous threats into an action, toleration or omission that causes financial damage.

In the case of aggravated extortion, the coercion must additionally take particularly serious forms, such as threats of death, severe mutilation, kidnapping, arson, the destruction of economic existence, through prolonged agonizing coercion, through commercial practices or through continued extortion against the same person.

Result of the Offense:

The success of the crime lies in the occurrence of financial damage, which is directly attributable to the victim’s forced behavior.

Causality:

The financial damage must be a consequence of the violence or threat. Without the coercive effect, the victim would not have engaged in the asset-damaging behavior.

Objective Attribution:

The success is objectively attributable if exactly that risk is realized that the law wants to prevent, namely that assets are damaged by particularly intensive violence or serious threat via the behavior of the victim.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Distinction from other offences

The element of aggravated extortion under § 145 of the Criminal Code exists if extortion is committed under particularly serious circumstances. Here, too, the victim is coerced by violence or dangerous threats into asset-damaging behavior.

A characteristic is that the injustice goes beyond simple extortion, because particularly severe means of coercion, a prolonged agonizing coercive situation or other qualifying circumstances are added. The decisive factor remains that the victim acts themselves because they give in to the qualified coercion.

• § 105 StGB – Coercion: Coercion covers cases in which someone is forced to act, tolerate or omit something by violence or dangerous threats without any financial damage occurring. In both simple and aggravated extortion, financial damage is a mandatory part of the offense. If this asset component is missing, extortion is ruled out. The qualifications of aggravated extortion always require that there is initially an extortion that meets the elements of the offense.
• § 142 StGB – Robbery: Robbery is characterized by the fact that the perpetrator takes or extorts a movable object belonging to someone else, using violence against a person or by threatening with imminent danger to life or limb. In the case of aggravated extortion, this immediate act of taking is missing. The perpetrator causes the financial disadvantage indirectly via the behavior of the victim, who acts under particularly severe coercion. The decisive factor here, too, remains who causes the transfer of assets: In the case of robbery, the perpetrator themselves, in the case of aggravated extortion, the victim under qualified coercion.

Concurrences:

Genuine Concurrence:

Genuine concurrence exists if further independent offenses are added to the aggravated extortion, such as bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, property damage or dangerous threats, which are not already included in the qualified offense. In these cases, the offenses remain side by side, as different legal interests are affected.

Spurious Concurrence:

A non-genuine concurrence exists if another element of the offense completely covers the entire injustice of the aggravated extortion. In such constellations, the aggravated extortion takes a back seat as a subsidiary element of the offense, for example if the coercion and damage to property are completely absorbed into a more specific offense.

Multiple Offenses:

Multiple offenses exist if several acts of aggravated extortion are committed independently, for example in the case of clearly separated coercive situations or independent damages to property. Each act forms its own criminal law unit, provided that there is no natural unity of action.

Continued Action:

A uniform act can be assumed if several qualified acts of coercion and damage to property are in close temporal and factual connection and are supported by a uniform plan of action. The act ends as soon as no further qualified coercion takes place or the perpetrator abandons his intention to commit the act.

Burden of proof and evaluation of evidence

Public Prosecutor’s Office:

The public prosecutor’s office must prove that the accused has committed aggravated extortion. The starting point is proof of extortion, i.e. that the accused has acted on a person through violence or dangerous threats and thereby induced them to take an action, toleration or omission that causes financial damage.
In addition, it must be proven that at least one qualifying circumstance of aggravated extortion exists.

It must be proven, in particular, that

• an act of coercion was actually committed by force or dangerous threat,
• the force or threat was directed against a person,
• the victim has committed an action, toleration, or omission as a result of the coercion,
• this behavior has objectively led to financial damage to the victim or a third party,
• a causal connection exists between coercion and financial damage,
• the damage to property was precisely the result of the coercion,

and additionally at least one qualification characteristic of aggravated extortion is realized, in particular

• a threat of death, with significant mutilation or a striking disfigurement,
• a threat of kidnapping, arson or with endangerment by nuclear energy, ionizing radiation or explosives,
• a threat of destruction of economic existence or social standing,
• the prolonged placement of the coerced person or another person concerned in an agonizing state,
• a commercial commission,
• a prolonged continuation of the act against the same person,
• or that the act resulted in a suicide or attempted suicide of the coerced person or another person concerned as a consequence.

The public prosecutor’s office must also explain whether use of force, content of the threat, damage to property and qualification are objectively ascertainable, for example through

• as well as indications of the intensity, duration, repetition or commercial nature of the act.
• witness statements,
• communication records such as messages or emails,
• video recordings,
• medical findings,
• payment flows, contracts or transfers,
• as well as indications of the intensity, duration, repetition or commercial nature of the act.

Court:

The court examines all evidence in the overall context. It assesses whether, according to objective standards, there is coercion by violence or dangerous threats that has causally led to damage to property.
In addition, it must be examined whether the alleged qualification of aggravated extortion actually exists and can be established beyond doubt.

In doing so, the court takes into account in particular

• Type, intensity, and course of the use of force or threat,
• the temporal connection between coercion and asset-damaging behavior,
• the specific behavior of the victim and their freedom of choice,
• witness statements on the course of the act and the participation of the accused,
• communication content, proof of payment or other objective evidence,
• circumstances that indicate a serious coercive situation,
• whether a reasonable average person would assume coercion-induced behavior,
• whether the content of the threat corresponds to the qualified forms of threat of aggravated extortion,
• whether a prolonged agonizing state is comprehensibly documented,
• whether commercial practices or continuation of the act exists,
• and whether a suicide or attempted suicide is causally attributable as a consequence of the act.

The court clearly distinguishes between mere pressure situations without coercive quality, purely verbal conflicts, socially customary influences, as well as cases in which extortion exists, but the qualification of aggravated extortion cannot be proven.

Accused Person:

The accused person bears no burden of proof. However, she can point out reasonable doubts, especially regarding

• whether force or a dangerous threat was actually used,
• whether the coercion constituted a serious threat situation,
• whether a causal connection existed between coercion and financial damage,
• whether the victim’s behavior was voluntary,
• whether there was only psychological pressure without factual intensity,
• whether the alleged financial damage actually occurred,
• whether a qualification characteristic of aggravated extortion is actually fulfilled,
• whether a prolonged placement in an agonizing state exists,
• whether commercial practices or continuation is demonstrable,
• whether a suicide or attempted suicide is plausibly and causally attributable to the act,
• as well as in the case of contradictions or gaps in the accusation or in the case of alternative sequences of events.

She can also explain that actions were misunderstood, situation-related or without coercive character or that, although extortion is alleged, the requirements of aggravated extortion are not met.

Typical Assessment

In practice, the following evidence is particularly important in the case of aggravated extortion:

• Witness statements on the coercive situation, the intensity of the threat and the duration of the event,
• Messages, emails or other communication records on the content of the threat and the repetition,
• Payment receipts, transfers, or asset shifts,
• Video recordings or other objective documentation,
• Medical findings on injuries or psychological stress,
• Time sequences that prove the connection between coercion, damage to property and qualification,
• Indications of the commercial nature or continuation of the act,
• Documents on an alleged suicide or attempted suicide and its connection with the act.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Practical example

• Forced payment of money by threat of death: The perpetrator demands payment of a considerable sum of money from a person and expressly threatens death if payment is not made. Out of serious fear for his own life, the victim transfers the required amount himself. The perpetrator does not take the item directly, but forces conduct that is detrimental to assets. The damage to property occurs precisely as a result of the qualified threat. Due to the threat of death, there is aggravated extortion.
• Prolonged agonizing state due to continuous threats: The perpetrator repeatedly puts a person under pressure over a longer period of time by means of dangerous threats in order to extort ongoing payments of money. The victim lives permanently in fear and a state of psychological emergency and complies with the demands in order to avoid further escalation. The crucial factor is that the means used put the victim in an agonizing state for a prolonged period of time. In this case, too, the offense of aggravated extortion is fulfilled.

These examples illustrate the typical manifestations of aggravated extortion. A characteristic feature is that the perpetrator does not carry out any direct removal, but the injustice is significantly increased because either particularly serious disadvantages are threatened or the victim is exposed to an intensive coercive situation for a prolonged period of time. The focus of the injustice therefore lies in the extraordinary intensity of the coercion and not merely in the damage to property itself.

subjective elements of the offence

The subjective element of aggravated extortion pursuant to § 145 of the Criminal Code requires intent with regard to all characteristics of the extortion. The perpetrator must know that he is influencing a person by means of violence or dangerous threats and thereby inducing them to perform an action, toleration or omission that causes damage to property. He must recognize that the victim’s behavior is not voluntary, but coerced.

For intent, it is sufficient that the perpetrator seriously considers the coercion and damage to property to be possible and accepts this. Conditional intent is sufficient. Intentional intent is not required.

In the case of aggravated extortion, the intent must also relate to the qualifying circumstance. The perpetrator must at least tacitly accept that he is threatening particularly serious disadvantages, placing the victim in an agonizing state for a prolonged period of time, acting commercially, committing the act repeatedly, or that serious consequences such as suicide or attempted suicide may result from the coercive situation.

In the case of § 145 of the Criminal Code, an intent to enrich oneself is also required. The perpetrator must at least tacitly accept to obtain an unlawful financial advantage for himself or a third party.

There is no subjective element if the perpetrator seriously assumes an entitlement, the victim acts voluntarily or the perpetrator has no intent with regard to the qualifying circumstances.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Culpability and mistakes

Mistake of prohibition:

A mistake of prohibition only excuses if it was unavoidable. Anyone who engages in conduct that recognizably interferes with the rights of others cannot claim that they did not recognize the illegality. Everyone is obliged to inform themselves about the legal limits of their actions. Mere ignorance or a reckless error does not absolve one of responsibility.

Principle of culpability:

Only those who act culpably are punishable. Intentional offenses require that the perpetrator recognizes the essential events and at least accepts them as a possibility. If this intent is lacking, for example, because the perpetrator mistakenly assumes that their behavior is permitted or is voluntarily supported, at most negligence exists. This is not sufficient for intentional offenses.

Incapacity to be held accountable:

No guilt is attributed to someone who, at the time of the offense, was unable to recognize the injustice of their actions or to act in accordance with this insight due to a severe mental disorder, a pathological mental impairment, or a significant inability to control their actions. In case of corresponding doubts, a psychiatric assessment will be obtained.

Excusable state of necessity:

An excusable state of necessity may exist if the perpetrator acts in an extreme situation of duress in order to avert an acute danger to their own life or the lives of others. The behavior remains unlawful but can have a mitigating or excusing effect if there was no other way out.

Putative self-defense:

Anyone who mistakenly believes that they are entitled to an act of defense acts without intent if the error was serious and comprehensible. Such an error can reduce or exclude guilt. However, if a breach of duty of care remains, a negligent or mitigating assessment comes into consideration, but not a justification.

Extinction of punishment and diversion

Diversion:

A diversion is generally excluded in the case of aggravated extortion. The offense requires not only coercion by violence or dangerous threats, but also additional qualifying circumstances, such as particularly serious threats, a prolonged agonizing coercive situation, commercial or repeated actions, or particularly serious consequences of the crime. As a result, aggravated extortion regularly exhibits an exceptionally high degree of coercion and property injustice. This increased injustice of the act generally precludes a diversionary settlement.

In cases in which, despite the existence of aggravated extortion, the guilt appears to be quite exceptionally minor and the qualifying circumstances are only marginally realized, a diversion can theoretically be examined. However, with increasing intensity of the threat, longer-lasting coercion, commercial or repeated action, this possibility practically drops to zero.

Diversion may be considered if

• the guilt is altogether exceptionally minor,
• no significant violence was used,
• the qualifying threat is only of very minor intensity,
• the damage to property is minor and fully compensated,
• there is no systematic or repeated action,
• the facts of the case are clear and manageable,
• and the perpetrator is remorseful, cooperative, and willing to make amends.

If, in exceptional cases, a diversion is considered, the court may order payments of money, community service, supervision orders or victim-offender mediation. A diversion does not lead to a conviction or a criminal record entry.

Exclusion of Diversion:

Diversion is excluded if

• there is a significant use of violence or a particularly intensive dangerous threat,
• the accusation involves an exceptionally high potential for coercion or endangerment,
• the act was committed deliberately, purposefully, systematically or repeatedly,
• several independent acts of extortion exist,
• there is commercial or systematic behavior,
• particular aggravating circumstances are added,
• or the overall behavior constitutes a serious and sustained impairment of the victim’s freedom of choice.

Only in the case of clearly the slightest guilt, minimal coercion and immediate remorse can it be examined whether there is an absolute exceptional case of a diversionary settlement. In practice, diversion in the case of aggravated extortion is almost excluded and only conceivable in extreme exceptional cases.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Sentencing and consequences

The court assesses the penalty according to the extent of the damage to property, according to the nature, duration and intensity of the violence or particularly serious dangerous threat and according to how severely the victim’s freedom of choice and economic position were impaired. Of particular importance is which qualifying circumstance justifies the aggravated extortion, such as particularly serious threats, a prolonged agonizing coercive situation, repeated or commercial action, or particularly serious consequences of the crime. It must be taken into account whether the perpetrator acted in a targeted, planned or repeated manner and whether the behavior caused an exceptionally intensive coercive effect and a significant impairment of property.

Aggravating Factors Exist in Particular If

• the act was committed under particularly intensive use of violence or an exceptionally serious dangerous threat,
• there was a systematic, repeated or commercial approach,
• significant or existential damage to property has occurred,
• several assets or economically central positions were affected,
• acted despite recognizable resistance or particular vulnerability of the victim,
• the act was committed in a relationship of proximity, dependency, or superiority,
• or relevant prior convictions exist.

Mitigating Factors Include

• a clean record,
• a full confession and recognizable insight,
• an early termination of the criminal behavior,
• active and complete efforts at reparation,
• special stress or overstrain situations for the perpetrator,
• or an excessively long duration of proceedings.

A conditional remission of the prison sentence is only possible if the imposed sentence does not exceed two years and there is a positive social prognosis. In the case of aggravated extortion, however, this possibility is handled much more restrictively and is regularly only realistic in the case of an offense at the lower end of the sentencing range.

Penalty Range

For aggravated extortion, a prison sentence of one to ten years is provided for. The increased penalty range applies to cases in which particularly serious means of threat are used for extortion, the victim is exposed to an agonizing coercive situation for a prolonged period of time, action is taken commercially or repeatedly, or the act has exceptionally serious consequences, such as suicide or attempted suicide.

A less serious case is not provided for in the case of aggravated extortion. If one of the qualifying circumstances exists, the penalty range of one to ten years’ imprisonment must be applied. Mitigating circumstances can only have an effect within this penalty range, for example in the event of a lower intensity of the qualification, a limited duration of the act, a lower amount of damage or a personal burden on the perpetrator.

It should also be noted that, even in the case of aggravated extortion, not every threat is automatically punishable. Criminal liability is already excluded if the violence or threat used is not immoral, i.e. does not appear unfair, inappropriate or socially unacceptable. Anyone who pursues a legitimate concern and does not exert any inadmissible or excessive pressure is not acting unlawfully. If such a non-immoral constellation exists, criminal liability is completely excluded, so that there is no punishment.

Monetary Penalty – Day-fine System

Austrian criminal law calculates monetary penalties according to the day-fine system. The number of day-fines depends on the guilt, the amount per day depends on the financial capacity. In this way, the penalty is adapted to the personal circumstances and yet remains noticeable.

• Range: up to 720 daily rates – at least €4, maximum €5,000 per day.
• Practical formula: Approximately 6 months imprisonment corresponds to around 360 day-fines. This conversion serves only as orientation and is not a rigid scheme.
• In case of non-payment: The court can impose a substitute custodial sentence. As a rule, the following applies: 1 day of substitute custodial sentence corresponds to 2 day-fines.

Note:

In the case of aggravated extortion, imprisonment is regularly the priority due to the high penalty range. An exclusive fine is generally not considered here. The day-fine system is therefore only of subordinate importance, for example in connection with the conversion of short prison sentences, in the case of partially conditional remission or within the framework of sentencing, but not as an independent main penalty.

Imprisonment and (partially) suspended sentence

§ 37 of the Criminal Code: If the statutory penalty is up to five years, the court may, under the statutory conditions, impose a fine instead of a short prison sentence of no more than one year. This provision is not applicable to aggravated extortion. Since the penalty is up to ten years’ imprisonment, the replacement of a prison sentence with a fine is excluded from the outset. A fine can therefore not be imposed instead of a prison sentence.

§ 43 of the Criminal Code: A conditional remission of the prison sentence is possible if the imposed sentence does not exceed two years and the perpetrator has a positive social prognosis. In the case of aggravated extortion, this is only exceptionally considered. In view of the qualifying circumstances, a conditional remission is realistically only possible if the offense is at the absolute lower end of the penalty range and there are no pronounced aggravating factors.

§ 43a of the Criminal Code: The partially conditional remission allows a combination of unconditional and conditionally remitted parts of the penalty for prison sentences over six months and up to two years. In the case of aggravated extortion, this form can theoretically be applied, but in practice only in narrow exceptional cases, as the act regularly has a high degree of coercion and injustice. In the case of serious threats or sustained coercion, it is regularly excluded.

§§ 50 to 52 of the Criminal Code: The court may issue instructions and order probation assistance. In the case of aggravated extortion, these often concern intensive behavior-modifying measures, such as therapeutic requirements, structuring control measures or obligations to remedy the damage. The aim is to prevent further serious offenses and to enable controlled social reintegration.

Jurisdiction of the courts

Subject-matter Jurisdiction

In the case of aggravated extortion, the statutory penalty range is from one to ten years’ imprisonment. This excludes the jurisdiction of the district court, as it is only responsible for offenses with a penalty of up to one year’s imprisonment.

The regional court is therefore responsible in any case.

Due to the penalty of more than five years, aggravated extortion no longer falls within the jurisdiction of the individual judge. The main proceedings must therefore be conducted before the regional court as a court of lay assessors. This composition takes into account the significantly increased injustice and the considerable penalty.

However, a jury court is not competent, as aggravated extortion is neither threatened with life imprisonment nor provides for a lower limit of more than five years and is also not one of the offenses expressly assigned to the jury court.

Local Jurisdiction

The court at the place of the offense is generally locally competent, i.e., where the violence or dangerous threat was used and the asset-damaging behavior was set or brought about.

If the place of the offense cannot be clearly determined, the jurisdiction is based on

• the residence of the accused person,
• the place of arrest,
• or the seat of the competent public prosecutor’s office.

The proceedings are conducted where a practical and orderly implementation is best guaranteed.

Hierarchy of Courts

If a judgment is issued by the regional court as a court of lay assessors, the parties have the right of appeal to the higher courts.

An appeal can be lodged against the judgment. In addition, a plea of nullity is also regularly considered. The review is carried out by the higher regional court or, in the case of questions of nullity, by the Supreme Court.

In doing so, it is checked whether the proceedings were conducted properly and whether the legal assessment of the aggravated extortion is correct.

Civil claims in criminal proceedings

In the case of aggravated extortion, the injured party can assert their civil law claims directly in the criminal proceedings as a private party. Since aggravated extortion is also aimed at property-damaging behavior forced by violence or dangerous threats, the claims include in particular payments of money, transferred amounts, surrendered assets, waivers of claims and other financial disadvantages that have arisen as a result of the forced behavior.

Depending on the facts, consequential damages can also be claimed, for example if the forced payment or action has resulted in economic disadvantages, liquidity problems or operational damage.

The private party joinder inhibits the statute of limitations of all asserted claims as long as the criminal proceedings are pending. Only after legally binding conclusion does the limitation period continue to run, insofar as the damage has not been fully awarded.

A voluntary reparation, such as the repayment of amounts obtained, a compensation for the damage caused or a serious effort to provide compensation, can have a mitigating effect, provided that it is carried out in a timely and complete manner.

However, if the perpetrator acted under particularly intensive violence or a serious dangerous threat, in a planned or repeated manner, or if the act was associated with an exceptionally massive coercive situation, a subsequent remedy of the damage regularly loses a large part of its mitigating effect. In such constellations, a subsequent compensation can only partially compensate for the increased injustice of the aggravated extortion.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Overview of criminal proceedings

Commencement of Investigation

Criminal proceedings require a concrete suspicion, from which a person is considered an accused and can claim all rights of the accused. Since it is an official offense, the police and public prosecutor’s office initiate the proceedings ex officio as soon as a corresponding suspicion exists. A special declaration of the injured party is not required for this.

Police and Public Prosecutor’s Office

The public prosecutor conducts the preliminary investigation and determines the further course of action. The criminal police carry out the necessary investigations, secure evidence, take witness statements, and document the damage. Ultimately, the public prosecutor decides on discontinuation, diversion, or indictment, depending on the degree of culpability, the amount of damage, and the evidence.

Interrogation of the Accused

Before each interrogation, the accused person receives full instruction on their rights, particularly the right to remain silent and the right to legal counsel. If the accused requests legal counsel, the interrogation must be postponed. The formal interrogation of the accused serves to confront them with the accusation and to provide an opportunity for a statement.

Access to files

Access to files can be obtained from the police, public prosecutor, or court. It also includes items of evidence, provided that the purpose of the investigation is not thereby jeopardized. The private claimant’s joinder is governed by the general rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure and allows the injured party to assert claims for damages directly in criminal proceedings.

Main Hearing

The main hearing serves for oral evidence taking, legal assessment, and decision-making on any civil law claims. The court particularly examines the course of events, intent, amount of damage, and the credibility of statements. The proceedings conclude with a conviction, acquittal, or diversionary resolution.

Rights of the accused

• Information & defense: right to notification, legal aid, free choice of defense counsel, translation assistance, and submission of evidence motions.
• Silence & counsel: right to remain silent at any time; if a defense attorney is requested, the interrogation must be postponed.
• Duty to inform: prompt notification of suspicion and rights; exceptions only permitted to safeguard the purpose of the investigation.
• Practical access to files: investigation and trial records; access by third parties is restricted to protect the accused.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Practical guidance and behavioural advice

1. Maintain silence.
   A brief statement is sufficient: “I am exercising my right to remain silent and will first speak with my defense counsel.”
   This right applies from the very first interrogation by the police or the public prosecutor.
2. Contact defense counsel immediately.
   No statement should be made without access to the investigation files. Only after reviewing the files can the defense assess which strategy and evidence preservation measures are appropriate.
3. Secure evidence immediately.
   You should secure all available documents, messages, photos, videos, and other records as early as possible and keep copies. Digital data must be regularly backed up and protected from subsequent changes. Note down important individuals as potential witnesses and promptly record the sequence of events in a memorandum.
4. Do not contact the opposing party.
   Your own messages, calls, or posts may be used as evidence against you. All communication should take place exclusively through your defense counsel.
5. Secure video and data recordings in time.
   Surveillance videos from public transport, venues, or property management systems are often automatically deleted after only a few days. Requests for data preservation must therefore be submitted immediately to the operators, the police, or the public prosecutor’s office.
6. Document searches and seizures.
   In cases of house searches or seizures, you should request a copy of the warrant or record. Note the date, time, persons involved, and all items taken.
7. In case of arrest: make no statements about the matter.
   Insist on immediate notification of your defense counsel. Pre-trial detention may only be imposed if there is strong suspicion of guilt and an additional ground for detention. Less severe measures (e.g., pledge, reporting duty, contact ban) must take precedence.
8. Prepare reparation strategically.
   Payments, symbolic gestures, apologies, or other compensatory offers should be handled and documented exclusively through the defense. Structured reparation can positively influence diversion and sentencing.

Your Benefits with Legal Assistance

Aggravated extortion combines coercion by particularly intensive violence or a serious dangerous threat with damage to property. The legal assessment depends largely on the specific course of events, on the nature and intensity of the coercion, on the qualifying circumstances and on the evidence. Even minor deviations in the facts can determine whether there is actually aggravated extortion, only simple extortion, mere coercion or, in the absence of immorality, no criminal liability at all.

An early legal support ensures that the facts are correctly classified, evidence is critically assessed, and exculpatory circumstances are processed in a legally usable manner.

Our law firm

• examines whether the requirements for aggravated extortion are actually met or whether a different legal assessment is required,
• analyzes the evidence, in particular with regard to violence, qualified threat, duration of the coercive situation, causality and damage to property,
• clarifies whether the means used were immoral or whether an exception to criminal liability can be considered,
• develops a clear defense strategy that classifies the course of events completely and legally precisely.

As a criminal law firm, we ensure that any accusation of aggravated extortion is carefully examined and that the proceedings are conducted on a sustainable factual and legal basis.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation