The proceedings against Jérôme Boateng will probably be extended again: The football professional does not want to accept his second conviction for physical harm either. The defense filed an appeal against the verdict on Wednesday, as the Munich I district court announced. “He would like to be able to understand the sentence based on the written reasons for the judgment,” said Boateng’s lawyer Norman Nathan Gelbart of the German Press Agency. Whether the revision should then also be carried out will be decided at a later date.

However, on Wednesday – the last day before the deadline – the public prosecutor’s office also appealed after Boateng, as a spokeswoman for the prosecution said. The Bavarian Higher Regional Court must then decide whether there may have been legal errors in the judgment against Boateng.

A week ago, the Munich I district court found the 2014 soccer world champion guilty of attacks on his ex-girlfriend during a vacation in the Caribbean together in 2018. It imposed a fine of 120 daily rates of 10,000 euros each – a total of 1.2 million euros. This would mean that Boateng would have a criminal record, unlike the first-instance judgement.

Last year, the district court imposed a higher fine overall, but the number of daily rates was only half as high – specifically: 60 daily rates of 30,000 euros each – a total of 1.8 million euros. If more than 90 daily rates are convicted, they are considered to have had a criminal record. The public prosecutor had demanded a suspended sentence of one and a half years and an additional fine of 1.5 million euros.

“For us, the facts are more than proven,” judge Andreas Forstner said in the verdict. Boateng’s defenders, on the other hand, had requested an acquittal for the 34-year-old football professional. They assumed that his ex-girlfriend had invented and “instrumentalized” the allegations “in the fight for the children”. Lawyer Gelbart spoke in his closing speech of alleged contradictions in the statement by Boateng’s ex-girlfriend: “In case of doubt for the accused,” he said. “In doubtful pro reo.” Judge Forstner replied: “For us there are no dubious and therefore there is also nothing pro reo.”

Boateng’s lawyers complained that their client had been prejudiced against and in the course of the proceedings also filed a motion for bias against Judge Forstner. The give “to recognize that permissible defense behavior can and will have an aggravating effect,” said Gelbart on the last day of the trial. The accused must therefore assume that “the verdict has already been determined”.

Forstner had previously called on the defense attorneys not to artificially prolong the process with numerous requests for evidence, and said that procedural behavior could affect the sentencing in the verdict. The court rejected the application for bias. “The application only serves to delay the procedure,” said Forstner. “Non-procedural purposes” are intended. When the defense wanted to discuss the application further, Forstner said: “You reprimand that in the appeal and that’s fine.”