Stabbed to death in a park

21 Years After the Crime: Indictment in the Kammerer Murder Case

In June 2005, Daniela K. was found dead in front of a phone booth near Rapoldipark in Innsbruck.(Bild: Christof Birbaumer)

A bombshell in Tyrol: In the case of 19-year-old student Daniela Kammerer, who was found dead on June 23, 2005 (!) in front of a phone booth near Rapoldipark in Innsbruck, the district attorney’s office filed a murder charge with the Innsbruck Regional Court on Tuesday. The defendant is an Austrian man (42) who has been living in Australia for several years.

“The defendant is accused of killing Daniela K. with two forceful knife stabs to the chest and back,” said Hansjörg Mayr, spokesperson for the Innsbruck Public Prosecutor’s Office, on Tuesday afternoon. Notably: The defendant had already been arrested in late December 2013 and spent approximately seven weeks in pretrial detention on suspicion of murder at that time. However, the suspect was subsequently released.

DNA tests were repeatedly ordered because forensic investigation methods have continuously evolved and improved.

StA-Sprecher Hansjörg Mayr

Bild: Christof Birbaumer

Why the suspect was released
At the time, the suspicion against the defendant was based on various pieces of circumstantial evidence, “including his DNA traces on the body, on the victim’s clothing, and on the handlebars of Daniela K.’s bicycle,” according to Mayr. However, after a DNA trace from the defendant found on the victim’s clothing “proved not to be as conclusive as initially assumed, the defendant was released from custody and the preliminary investigation was closed in February 2014.”

In June 2005, Daniela K. was found dead in front of a phone booth near Rapoldipark in Innsbruck.(Bild: Christof Birbaumer)

But the case was not closed: The district attorney’s office continued to leave no stone unturned in its efforts to solve the case. “Among other things, DNA tests were repeatedly commissioned—including on evidence that had already been examined—because forensic examination methods have continuously evolved and improved.”

Daniela Kammerer was murdered in June 2005.(Bild: BPD, Christof Birbaumer)

DNA trace on cigarette
Recent DNA tests revealed a DNA trace from the defendant on the filter of a barely smoked cigarette that had been left in the phone booth. “From this, the prosecution concludes that the defendant was at the crime scene.”

Facts and figures

• Under Austrian law, there is no statute of limitations for murder.

• The crime of murder is punishable by imprisonment for 10 to 20 years or life imprisonment.

• A preliminary investigation that has already been closed may be reopened against a suspect if new facts or evidence come to light that, on their own or in conjunction with the remaining findings of the investigation, appear sufficient to justify a conviction of the suspect.

• Under the law, the public prosecutor’s office must file charges if a conviction is likely; otherwise, the proceedings must be discontinued. The presumption of innocence continues to apply despite the filing of charges.

• Over the past nearly 21 years, possible suspicions have been repeatedly examined against various individuals. “However, based on all the investigative findings now available, there is concrete suspicion only against the defendant,” according to the public prosecutor’s office.

• The investigation file now comprises over 480 documents, some of which are over 100 pages long, including more than 20 forensic reports, some of which involve multiple trace evidence analyses.

Based on these new findings, the suspicion against the defendant has been further substantiated. Therefore, the public prosecutor’s office has filed charges. “A jury will now decide on the defendant’s guilt or innocence based on the extensive findings of the investigation,” Public Prosecutor’s Office spokesperson Mayr added.

“Voluntary appearance at the trial”
What happens next? With the filing of the indictment, the public prosecutor’s office has revoked the arrest warrant against the defendant. The defendant’s defense attorney has indicated that the defendant intends to appear voluntarily for the trial. The indictment is not yet legally binding. It may be challenged within 14 days.

A date for the trial before the jury court has therefore not yet been set.