Since more details have emerged about the hours-long torture of SPD mayor-elect Iris Stalzer, in which the chief prosecutor himself said the adopted daughter appeared to be responsible, the case has become highly politicized. Now, the fact that the adopted daughter, 17-year-old Zoe, is not being arrested has sparked sharp controversy.

Using the German legal code, Spiegel is one of the outlets attempting to explain away why the girl was not charged with attempted murder. However, this analysis is coming into question. Not only are legal scholars questioning the lack of an attempted murder charge — and why there is no arrest at all — but every AI system tested clearly states that, given the reported facts of the case, the attempted murder charge should stand.

In effect, the chief prosecutor’s decision to drop the attempted murder charge is highly dubious “withdreawl” clause in the German legal system.

Germany: Mayor tortured for hours in basement by her own adopted daughter, according to shocking new details leaked by police

What happened?

First, it is worth going through the details of the case again. For starters, Zoe reportedly already had a worrying history of domestic violence, including threatening her mom with a knife in the past, according to reports from multiple German newspapers, including Bild, Focus, Welt, and Spiegel. This is all despite her being taken in at an early age, 17 years ago, from the African country of Mali, which has seen unbelievable violence during its ongoing civil war. In other words, Stalzer may have saved her from a literal “hell” existence in Africa. The brother, Frantz, was adopted from Haiti when he was 5.

Bild also released a report two days ago detailing how, before the torture session, Stalzer went to the police station to state she was terrified of her daughter and felt her life was in danger, but the police reportedly did not help her.

The case of the German SPD mayor who was allegedly stabbed by her adopted daughter is getting stranger and stranger

In other words, this was not a one-time moment of insanity, but a long and ongoing issue the mother faced with her daughter.

Second, Stalzer was stabbed a total of 13 times, including in her lungs and stomach. Bild also noted that Stalzer was hit on her head with a blunt object, causing a skull fracture. The daughter allegedly did this out of “revenge.”

“At 12:05 p.m., the adopted daughter herself dialed the emergency number, claiming that her mother had been ambushed and seriously injured by several men. The mayor was found covered in blood in a living room armchair: 13 stab wounds in the upper body, with hematomas, and a skull fracture,” writes Bild.

Stalzer’s daughter also reportedly used a deodorant spray can with a lighter to set Stalzer’s hair and clothing on fire.

“The girl is said to have tried to use deodorant spray and a lighter to set her adoptive mother’s hair and clothes on fire. Then she tortured her for hours in the basement and finally stabbed her with two knives – out of ‘revenge’ because, unlike the family’s adopted son (15), she felt neglected and disadvantaged,” Bild further writes.

There are also reports from police sources that the daughter allegedly scrubbed a crime scene of numerous large blood stains. They were only later revealed by forensic investigators.

So, Bild and many other news outlets have established that Stalzer was subjected to incredible levels of torture. Numerous papers also note that Stalzer nearly died from her injuries. However, again, the public prosecutor so far has said the girl will not be arrested, and instead she was sent to a Youth Welfare Office. She has since been reportedly transferred to a psychiatric ward.

Spiegel’s opinion

Regarding Spiegel, the essential claim from the magazine — and this is also the claim the chief public prosecutor also uses — is that because the girl called the police at the last moment after a grueling torture session of her mother, this constitutes a “withdrawal from the attempt.” It therefore makes sense that she was not charged with attempted murder.

Not so fast.

As Bild writes, esteemed criminal defense attorney Hans Reinhard from Marl has already raised doubts over claims the adopted daughter should not be charged with attempted murder.

“The decisive factor is the perpetrator’s perception when aborting the crime. The perpetrator must therefore be subjectively aware that if he stops now, his actions will not lead to the victim’s death. I consider this extremely dubious in this case, given the blatant use of violence. Furthermore, the perpetrator is said to have covered up evidence and led the police on a false trail,” stated Reinhard.

Can someone really just torture someone else in Germany, wait until they are close to death, and then call the police and say: “Hey, sorry about the life-changing torture, my bad?”

Here is what Spiegel magazine writes:

“Naturally, such a crime raises the suspicion of homicide. Given the potentially particularly gruesome nature of the method, including numerous stab wounds to the upper body, at least one element of murder would likely be met. The victim, the mayor-elect of Herdecke, Iris Stalzer (SPD), survived. This leaves only attempted murder or attempted manslaughter as a possibility. When questioned, Stalzer implicated her adopted daughter and not her adopted son, who was also in the apartment.”

The magazine goes on, noting:

However, and this is where things get a little complicated, it was apparently the adopted daughter who called the emergency services when Stalzer lay seriously injured on the ground. In doing so, she apparently ensured that Stalzer did not succumb to her injuries.

In legal terms, she would have prevented the so-called success of the crime from occurring. When a perpetrator does this (or abandons the commission of the crime early on), it is referred to as a “withdrawal from the attempt.” This exempts from punishment, meaning that a punishment for this specific offense is ruled out. The same applies to manslaughter. This also applies to assault offenses.

Here is the essential point. What did the daughter do to actually save her mother’s life? After she called the police — and blamed a “group of men” for the torture session — what did she do? Did she work to save her mother’s life?

All reports indicate that she did not. Instead, she scrubbed the crime scene.

Does that sound like someone truly “remorseful” who is looking to “withdraw” from murder, or someone more interested in covering their tracks?

Spiegel argues the only charge she could be tried for is “dangerous bodily harm,” for which a somewhat lower penalty is imposed, but the daughter has not even been arrested on this charge yet.

At the very least, this “withdrawal,” based on what all sources are reporting, is so flimsy that only a trial can clarify the facts in this case. “Withdrawal from the attempt” should not apply when you are actively scrubbing a crime scene while your mother continues to bleed out.

It should not be the case that a human being can torture another human being for hours, but as long as they call the police and they are saved at the last moment, they avoid an attempted murder charge, especially if they are not truly working to save a life, but instead are working to mislead and obfuscate.

German law does not allow a “get-out-of-jail” free card here.

Spiegel even notes that the entire basis for the phone call to the police only came after the mother promised she would not reveal the daughter’s role in the torture. Another extremely dubious element of this entire case.

The case is now political

Notably, the right has been all over this case, claiming it is an example of “two-tier” justice. Many social media users are saying it is a symbol of “Europe” — the altruistic left-wing career woman, who becomes mayor for the left-wing Social Democrats (SPD), who takes in children from foreign countries to be a “good person,” only to have one of those children nearly torture her to death. Everyone on the right making such claims may be entirely wrong, but in the end, such comments should also be irrelevant to the facts of the case.

Insane

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 10, 2025

However, they are not “irrelevant.” Why? Now, the case is political, and questions are being asked about how this case is being handled.

Spiegel is very much in the “establishment” camp.

It could be running “fact checks” on this case in a pushback against the right.

Both sides are hardened in their positions on a range of issues, and nobody wants either side to score political points. No matter what, when a case becomes political, it can take on other dimensions that go beyond justice and the law.

Can AI give us an answer?

Beyond the issue of attempted murder, the girl has not even been charged — so far. AI is not omnipotent, but Remix News asked all the top AI programs (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Grok, and Gemini), about whether it would the fact that you called the police to save someone’s life would save you from being tried after torturing someone for hours, including whether it would constitute a “withdrawal of attempt.”

In fact, all the AI tools came to the same conclusion. All of them agreed that if the perpetrator really did scrub the crime scene while the mother was in the process of coming close to dying, then this would not constitute a “genuine” withdrawal of the act. Furthermore, even if the case was not an attempted murder, all tools agreed the suspect should face trial for various other serious charges.

Spiegel legal writers should think about running their article through an AI check before publication. This is not meant to be an insult. A Harvard Law School study has shown that top legal firms in the U.S. are increasingly turning to AI to solve tough legal problems and produce more accurate outcomes for clients. Again, AI is not the final say on all matters, but if AI tools all offer the same conclusion, then it is a factor legal writers should take into consideration.

Google’s Gemini actively contradicts the Spiegel article. Here is the text:

“That is a crucial distinction under German law. When the perpetrator is bleeding out and actively scrubbing the crime scene instead of rendering aid, it generally nullifies any claim of a valid “withdrawal from the attempt” (Rücktritt vom Versuch).

Requirements for a Valid Withdrawal

According to $\S 24$ of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB), a withdrawal from an attempted murder or manslaughter requires the perpetrator to either:

1. 1. Give up the further commission of the crime (Unfinished Attempt): The perpetrator simply stops before believing the crime is irreversible.

   2. Actively prevent the completion of the crime (Finished Attempt): If the perpetrator believes they have done everything necessary for the victim to die, they must then perform a voluntary and genuine counter-act that causes the prevention of the victim’s death.

In your scenario, since the victim is “bleeding out,” the attempt is likely considered finished. The perpetrator believes their actions (the torture and stabbing) will lead to death.

2. The Failure to Act (No Genuine Counter-Act)

For a withdrawal to be valid in a finished attempt, the counter-act must be genuine and aimed at saving the victim’s life.

• • Calling the police can be a valid counter-act if it is the decisive, life-saving measure.

  • However, if the perpetrator is concurrently scrubbing the crime scene, this action directly conflicts with the necessary genuine remorse and intent to save the victim. Cleaning up blood is an act of collusion/obstruction(Verdunkelung), which proves that the perpetrator’s primary motivation at that time was self-interest (avoiding punishment), not saving the life.

A withdrawal is an act of penitence that must show the perpetrator has truly turned away from their criminal goal. Actions that run parallel to an attempt to save the victim, but are intended to conceal the crime, severely undermine the required voluntariness and genuineness of the saving act.

The Spiegel authors also fail to note that hours-long torture can also produce serious psychological trauma, even if there is no lasting injury, and under German law, this can also fall under the more serious category of “grievous bodily harm.” It is also not entirely clear how Stalzer will recuperate from this incident, but either way, it could lead to lasting psychological impairment.

“German jurisprudence (court decisions) consistently recognizes that severe, lasting psychological trauma—such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), severe depressive disorders, or irreversible psychological changes resulting from the violence—can constitute such a ‘severe impairment of health,’ thus qualifying the crime as grievous bodily harm. This is especially true after an hours-long torture session. The impairment does not have to be physical to qualify as ‘serious.”

When in doubt regarding an incredibly rare and severe case of torture, attempted murder and “grievous bodily harm” seem more appropriate.

It is not worth copying and pasting all the AI tool responses, but Grok was also asked about whether the case would also be brought to trial, even if the “withdrawal” clause is in effect. Here is what Grok stated:

Yes, you would be arrested in Germany for such actions, as they constitute multiple serious criminal offenses under the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB), including dangerous bodily harm (§224 StGB), grievous bodily harm (§226 StGB), and potentially coercion (§240 StGB) or ill-treatment if the victim qualifies as defenseless (§225 StGB, which explicitly mentions “tortures” in this context).

These are public prosecution offenses for severe cases, meaning the state would pursue charges regardless of the victim’s wishes.

Bringing the victim nearly to death could also qualify as attempted manslaughter (§212 StGB) or murder (§211 StGB), depending on intent. While voluntarily abandoning an attempt and preventing completion (e.g., by calling emergency services) could exempt you from punishment specifically for the attempted offense under §24 StGB, the hours of prior torture would still be treated as completed acts of bodily harm, which are independently punishable with imprisonment ranging from months to 10+ years, depending on severity.

Rendering aid afterward might be considered as a mitigating factor during sentencing under principles like victim-offender mediation or restitution (§46a StGB), potentially reducing the penalty, but it does not prevent arrest, investigation, or conviction for the harm already inflicted.

A dangerous precedent?

Ultimately, this case could be setting a very dangerous precedent.

It is scary to think about, but if there is indeed no arrest and no trial, it could effectively mean another suspect, such as Zoe, can torture another human being for hours at a time, lie to investigators, scrub a crime scene, and then walk away without any arrest — so long as they call the police.

In fact, a person does not need to even show “remorse” and work to save the victim’s life. They can simply start working on scrubbing a crime scene while a tortured individual continues bleeding out.

Is this really the precedent Germany wants to set?

The reality is that what happened to Stalzer is one of the more shocking cases in the German Republic’s history. Has a politician in modern Germany ever been tortured in such a manner?

If a trial determines Zoe, the daughter, is innocent of all criminal offenses because she called the police while reportedly scrubbing a crime, then let the courts decide that. It would be a horrible precedent, but it would have at least been tried in a court of law.

Furthermore, if the daughter did not torture her mother, stab her 13 times, set her hair on fire, fracture her skull, and did not lie to investigators and scrub the crime scene — which is what every major newspaper in the country is reporting right now — then she deserves to clear her name in a court of law.

However, this level of torture cannot stand in a civilized nation if it did indeed happen as the media is reporting.

Regardless of how this case develops, Stalzer herself did not deserve what happened to her. She is not only a tragic figure, but a victim of torture, allegedly from her own adopted daughter. Her world is likely shattered.

This should never happen again. Trying the suspect in court is vital to ensuring deterrence and justice for the victim, as well as set an important precedent: Torture will not be accepted in Germany.