TV comeback Barbara Seles: Legal retiree

Guest contribution by Lorenz Leitmeier


Reactionary judge Barbara Selish is back. RTL has provided them with new cases and a moral compass – there are jokes about outsiders and reasons for reviewing at the top. Also at the end is solid irony Lorenz Litmer been used.

2022 is a great year for all fans of film and TV entertainment: Top Gun and Barbara Selish, two old men of the last millennium, are back. The past doesn’t really go away. While Top Gun was at best able to maintain its unparalleled level right from the start, Barbara Salesch 2.0 (highest stream on RTL) was announced as an improved premium version of the original (at the time on SAT 1), with “the latest developments and “Modern Evidence”; Stories that are based on real events are told, and there is also a “moral compass”. Once again, let’s read together: RTL has a moral compass. WhatsApp insults instead of yelling, moral judgment, true crime like bullshit: in order to be able to enjoy the anticipation of this year’s TV return for much longer, one would like to postpone the start of broadcasting again – for a year can?

The judges will have to admit that they are judges who should never, ever, never say something like that

Well the Last Resurrection is not working again, every working day at 11 am. Hopefully the target group will set the alarm. In the first episode, the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney gather before a hearing in the judge’s room in an elegant group of four with a dog, joking and teasing, wanting to greet Mrs. Salch appropriately. The prosecutor makes a strange joke to Wuahaha about the physical size of the judge and the dog, so that one will know right away: The pointer on the man’s watch must have been frozen long ago. Mrs. Salish, who is known to have fallen into a tub with social intelligence, defuses the situation with humor and shares how she finds a witness statement from the file: “He could tell his grandmother that.” In real life, a judge might beg ordinary judges to never say such a thing, the word “bias” would be written in slow motion – here the judge herself provides the reason for the refusal. Maybe you don’t feel like negotiating anymore? But fortunately, the defense attorney does not care about these mistakes, and it is very good to work with Mrs. Selish again.

OK then. The accused is nurse Bettina Forster, who took care of “financial genius” 75-year-old Erica Merz at home and one evening, when Mrs. worth 100,000 euros. Theft, deprivation of liberty, assault, a nice case for the common judge. There are also two ordinary judges, but they do not utter a single word to the end. The Chief Prosecutor is asked to politely read the indictment (“Mr. Romer, please!”), which does so without errors, Mrs. Salch politely thanks her, but as a precaution, does not lecture the accused on her right to remain silent – DOI, reason to appeal . But who would be so young and demanding of thoroughness in criminal proceedings? Or did someone at the time want to see Professor Brinkman’s qualification thesis from the Black Forest Clinic? The accused denies everything anyway, the average judge aka Barbara Salesch drills against the wall, the prosecutor nods and shakes each question so realistically that every spectator knows what he’s thinking. In addition to the inevitable commentary on criminal law (“Fisher”), there is also a comment on drug law on the defense attorney’s table – is it tick?

Ethics packed into the hammer

Then comes the victim Mrs. Merz, an extroverted, red-haired woman in the prime of her life. For a moment, one wonders why one sitting on top with a robe and the other without a robe should answer the questions, but perhaps it is as so often in life: it may be different also, but so it is. Better not to ask too specific questions, who wants answers here? Then Mrs. Merz shares how bad it was for her when she was locked up. The prosecutor and the defense attorney also ask, things get very muddied, and in the end only one knows: everything is terrible. Morality is full of a sledgehammer: society’s indispensable, but chronically underpaid carers – is crime a motive? And you can not trust the banks, they prefer to hide the gold in a can of cocoa. The defense attorney portrays Ms. Mears as elderly, and the attorney general is complaining about this “age discrimination”. Ms Selish reports that she has already thought about how long she can live on her own, and that these questions will also be put to the attorney general and defense attorney. Oh dear where is the remote control, do you urgently need the red button on the top left?

RTL ethical compass needle spins like a fan

As the next witness, Mrs. Mers’ daughter then describes her mother as tough, who in turn yells at her daughter from the spectator’s seat. Then comes the neighbor, the owner of the land who unfortunately broke and has a motive. Spellbound, one wonders if one sees the culprit or just a smokescreen, when all of a sudden—oh my god, a dramatic twist: Mrs. Merz’s daughter sees on her smartphone at that very moment, really during a court hearing, that someone is in the mother’s house. What happens seems to be frozen for a few seconds – a crack in the space-time continuum? No, Mrs. Seles thinks. Soon the negotiations were interrupted, the police were dispatched, and an 18-year-old was caught red-handed: an online acquaintance of the grandson, who took advantage of his feelings and made him steal from his grandmother. A grandson steals from his grandmother: The needle of the RTL moral compass is spinning like a fan at this moment – maybe a magnet under the judge’s seat? In the lawsuit against the nurse, Ms. Selish deals with the allegations against the grandson and his partner at the same time. RTL will certainly introduce the regulation that allows this, if the legal situation might be as modern as Barbara Salesch at some point.

The grandson, who acts like a diamond in secret, does not exaggerate his repertoire of facial expressions and leaves the viewer confused as to what level of identification he takes: Is he playing the role of a witness suspected of a crime? Or does he play himself as if he were the culprit? Or does he just act on himself, ignoring that the case is fictional? Could it have been deliberately hidden? However, in principle, it does not matter, Judge barbarasalesch is of course the best to play anyway, one would think that she knows CPC in real life as well. She put the two young criminals apart so lightly, it’s a big publicity stunt for law school. It wouldn’t be a surprise if many young people were enrolled in the next semester.

However, if you have already done so and are a qualified attorney (!), then you swallow hard: how should you, if someone takes a break from gardening and shows from the status (retired) what is possible in this job – how should you since He filled his office again? Anyone who has tried how Jimi Hendrix plays guitar with his teeth will no longer perform a taped concert (“Die Vogelhochzeit”). In the end, Bettina Forster was acquitted, and thank God the truth came out in time. Then, fortunately, an hour passed and this criminal procedure cartoon was over, and at some point the most solid sarcasm no longer protected it.

After this show, viewers far from the Jura will have an idea of ​​what is happening in German courtrooms as they have known since “Baywatch” what the Savior is doing. Anyone who thinks this warm dish is an original idea could have been born the day before yesterday at the earliest. Then instead “Wetten, dass…” with three badger bets. The curtain was closed and two unanswered questions: Where is the “Alexander Criminal Court”? W: Will Gerhard Schroeder really become a chancellor again?

Author d. Lorenz Letmer is a district court judge and currently a full-time lecturer at the University of Applied Sciences in Bavaria (HföD), Ministry of Justice.

Leave a Comment