This page concerns the submission of the Prosecutor General’s Office dated 14.07.2026 in appeal proceedings 2 Ws 111/26.
1 Application for dismissal by reference to the contested decision
The submission requests that my sofortige Beschwerde (immediate appeal) be dismissed as unfounded — “by reference to the reasons for the order of 24.06.2026”. That is precisely the decision against which my appeal is directed. There is no independent examination of the procedural facts I raised.
§ 311 StPO · § 160 Abs. 2 StPO (duty also to investigate exonerating circumstances) · Art. 103 Abs. 1 GG
Significance: The appellate instance thus receives no second examination, but a repetition of the first.
Chronology No. 170Alternative hypothesis Reference to the reasons for the contested decision is common and permissible in appeal proceedings if the authority considers them correct; a separate submission would merely repeat them.
What is missing An examination of the procedural facts I had newly raised — precisely those that are not the subject of the contested decision.
2 The same authority, the same method
The same authority issued the submission of 26.05.2026 (Annex 148_F2), which relies on the diagnostic procedure with no author identified, as well as the letter of 01.07.2025 finding that there were no procedural violations — on the basis that my Revision (appeal on points of law) had been dismissed.
§ 160 Abs. 2 StPO · § 147 GVG (supervision) · Art. 19 Abs. 4 GG
Alternative hypothesis An authority takes a consistent position in the same matter; that is consistency, not a method.
What is missing An independent examination. § 160 Abs. 2 StPO requires the prosecution also to investigate exonerating circumstances. No such investigation is apparent in any of the three documents.
3 The verbatim reproduction — and the page initially missing
The decisive sentence in the submission states that the convicted person is driven by strong feelings of anger, a pronounced sense of having been wronged and a clearly expressed urge for retribution. Almost the same wording already appears in the diagnostic procedure of JVA Moabit (Moabit Prison) of 17.04.2026 — five weeks earlier and from a different body.
The very page containing this sentence was missing from the version sent to me on 17.06.2026 before the hearing. The first page of the reasons was immediately followed by the final page. I received the complete version on 14.07.2026 — twenty days after the decision based on it.
Art. 103 Abs. 1 GG · § 33 Abs. 3 StPO
Alternative hypothesis Authorities quote from prison files; an almost verbatim reproduction proves only that the same source was used.
What is missing A second source. The decisive sentence is based on a single unsigned document. And the very page containing that sentence was missing from the version initially sent to me; I had the complete version only twenty days after the decision.
4 The authority’s own concession on the same page
On that very page, the Prosecutor General’s Office concedes that a comprehensive admission of guilt is not an indispensable requirement and that denial of the act alone cannot support a negative social prognosis. Yet it is precisely the failure to acknowledge the act that is used against my release.
Art. 2 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 20 Abs. 3 GG · nemo tenetur
Significance: The contradiction appears within a single written submission by the same authority. It is the subject of the constitutional complaint of 01.09.2026.
Annex 197_F2, section C.IV
Alternative hypothesis The authority states the legal position correctly and assesses the denial as only one factor among several — that is permissible.
What is missing The other factors. Apart from the failure to acknowledge the act, no independent consideration is identified that would support the negative prognosis on its own.
Sources: Annexes 148_F2, 149_F2 · Case 2 chronology, Nos. 170, 189, 192 · Annexes 132_F2, 137_F2, 197_F2. This page presents Dmitry Bagrash’s account and legal assessment and distinguishes between documented episodes and information provided by the person concerned.