Used furniture or scrap?
Do they have good used furniture as "junk" only because declared in order to be able to serve himself? In four concrete cases, this accusation by the public prosecutor's office arose in the course of the two-and-a-half-hour court hearing yesterday, friday, at habfurt district court. A 41-year-old defendant was sentenced to a fine of 1,200 euros for embezzlement, and two others, aged 35 and 43, were fined 500 and 450 euros for aiding and abetting. The verdict is valid.
Furniture for the own apartment
In the habberge district, good used furniture does not end up in the rubbish incinerator, but is returned to the burghers for a small fee. For this purpose, the waste management company of the district has initiated a social project. Here, a number of unemployed people who are employed on a temporary basis for the purpose of reintegration are struggling with this task.
Three of these former employees are now in the dock. From november 2011 to january 2012, according to the indictment, they are said to have sold "good used" so that one of them could furnish his private apartment with it.
Some of the accusations were dropped in the course of taking evidence, four accusations remained. The items in question were a bed, a refrigerator, a couch and a stereo system. Two of the three defendants claimed that these objects were defective and that they were "only saved from the landfill" have.
Basis of trust
In any case, the fact was that the main defendant could use these things after all and they ended up in his private garage and apartment. In none of these cases was the superior informed. Because the two buddies helped with the unloading, they were accused of aiding and abetting embezzlement.
The district's waste consultant, who was called as a witness, confirmed that the three employees decide on site with the customers what is usable or not. In this respect, the entire collection system is essentially based on trust. Only random control calls to the burgers check that the used furniture is disposed of properly.
In his summation, prosecutor christopher lehmann called two of the three men "notorious offenders, because, among other things, they had a conviction for fraud?. Since the 41-year-old main offender is under ongoing custody, the lawyer in this case even requested a custodial sentence.
Lawyer ralf flothe pointed out, however, that on the one hand it was only a matter of low-value economic goods and that his client had also offered to return the goods to the waste management company.
The district court left it at the fines, which are already legally valid. Judge roland wiltschka accused all three convicted of abusing the trust placed in them. With regard to the desired integration into working life, he rubbed the men's noses in it: "not like this," he said!".