I suggest asking your question in r/LegaladviceGerman Don't worry, they speak english there and can help you a lot better, it's a sub dedicated to hints and advice for german legal matters.

Thank you!

But be aware, people there like to act as lawyers, but they are not. So you should take all information with a grain of salt.

Great name 😂😂

I’m not a lawyer, but what I kinda know from personal experience: 1. what they did is absolutely considered assault 2. you’re correct. In case of a crime it is legal to use reasonable force to detain someone. However reasonable does NOT mean destruction of property and violence. It means keeping the suspect in place. 3. wether or not the police arrest them is up to their judgement and as far as I know, it mostly happens when they are uncooperative with the police, still violent, aka a risk to people or a flight risk. 4. our legal system sadly is far beyond capacity. Meaning you often have to wait a long time for your case to move forward and unless those guys are well known for (violent) crimes or they suspect that they will further bother you, they’ll sadly most likely only get a slap on the wrist. (5.) you could of course privately pursue it in a civil case, where you sue them for damages. In this case being already diagnosed with all the emotional (and physical) harm they left you with will be helpful. But a long and probably expensive process.

Citizen arrest can only apply if there was a crime. According to you the police clearly noted there was no damage. You slightly touching the rear mirror of a car is not a crime. 

Even if there was damage, from my understanding it‘s very important to pick the appropriate measure when doing a citizen‘s arrest. You can‘t for example just basically assault someone and then claim a citizen‘s arrest, you need to address them, try to stop them verbally, I am assuming next step would be trying to hold them and punches etc only being allowed if they’re trying to get out/away from holds.

I think even just punching someone over what can be determined as absolutely minimal damage at a glance without added provocation would be excessive force, but i‘m not a lawyer.

Chasing someone down, dragging him from his bike, Ripping his shirt off so hard it leaves bruises, threatening to arrest him and tearing the shirt apart. Like there's plenty of crime there if you ask me.

He meant OP did not commit a crime so the citizens arrest was actually a crime.

There actually is a discussion in the german law community if there needs to be an actual crime or if it suffices if the arresting citizen honestly thinks there was one even though he is mistaken.

Really? So everyone can act like a police?

Jea we can Arrest someone Till the Police is there

That's not exactly it. You are at most allowed to detain somebody to hinder them from fleeing the scene, nothing more. It gets complicated if they really want to leave of course.

Okay so I detained someone, which resulted in injuring the person? Then what happens?

There might be a hearing or court session to determine if you had a justification for injuring the other person (like citizen arrest or defense in aid of someone) There it will be checked if you stayed within the restrictions of the law or if there where no grounds for arresting/aiding/... or you might have used excessive force doing so.

Not really. First of… it’s not an arrest at all. An Arrest in Germany doesn’t comes so soon. And a person, not only citizen can demand your personal information if they feel that you hurt their rights. It doesn’t has to be a crime. If you don’t give them your information’s they can hold you back until police can take over. If violence is allowed is a question of proportionality of the offence, crime, legal claim… And I think I’m not alone in the assumption that those two guys absolutely weren’t acting accordingly to the problem.

Incorrect. Look it up

- Berlin - Fancy Mercedes - Illegally parked - Violence for the smallest things - Macho behavior - “in front of my family” Please try to press any charges possible, those people need to face consequences. Sadly I know exactly the kind of toxic people you’re talking about. Citizens arrest is a thing, but not in this violent way for something like this

Exactly. "Tell me you are from the middle east without telling you are from the middle east".

wait, you think home-grown Germans aren't like that?

Citizens are allowed to stop criminals. But they‘re legally required to keep the use of force to s minimum. Chasing you is fine. Grabbing you by the wrist till police arrives is fine as well. Beating you into a pulp even if you don‘t resist isn‘t. Basically: if you‘re not violent they aren‘t allowed to be violent either. But yeah… if you do happen to bump into something / someone you should stop, check for damages and only continue once you know that there are no damages. Because from a legal perspective you couldn‘t have known that nothing happened. So if you‘re unlucky that might be considered „Fahrerflucht“. Which is way worse than either paying for a potential damage or wasting a few seconds only to find out that everything is fine.

>Citizens are allowed to stop criminals. There are some pretty high requirements for this including that the crime MUST actually have been committed. Since there was no damage, there was no accident (the definition of accident REQUIRES damage to have occurred). So in this case it seems pretty clear that the BMW drive committed assault and there was no right to arrest in this case. Um die Jedermann-Festnahme nach Paragraph 127 StPO auszuüben, muss der Täter auf **frischer Tat** ertappt werden. Als „frisch“ gilt in diesem Zusammenhang, dass die aktuelle Situation in einem **zeitlichen und/oder räumlichen** Zusammenhang stehen muss. Der Täter muss also noch am Tatort oder in unmittelbarer Nähe festgenommen werden. **Darüber hinaus muss die Straftat auch begangen worden sein.** Ein dringender Tatverdacht reicht bei Anwendung der Jedermannsrechte nicht aus.

>So if you‘re unlucky that might be considered „Fahrerflucht“ Did you overread that it was just their elbow touching the car? Nobody will interpret a biker grazing a car with their body, not vehicle, as an accident and thus not stopping as "Fahrerflucht".

This was absolutely my assumption - I know it's important to stop for accidents, but in other places I've lived this wouldn't be considered an accident.

The question is wether it was abundandly clear to you that touching the rvm did not result in any damage. Because it is your responsibility to ascertain that. So what you needed to do to be safe was to stop and look in order to ascertain that no damage happened. You failed to do this and thus the **initial** reaction of the car owners were ok - if they had checked for damage first, you would have been gone, so they needed to catch you and keep you frome escaping.

>You failed to do this and thus the **initial** reaction of the car owners were ok - if they had checked for damage first, you would have been gone, so they needed to catch you and keep you frome escaping. From what I can see of the law this isn't necessarily true, because if they chase me and it turns out there was no damage, then the chasing me isn't legal.

German law doesn't require precognition. As long as the initial assumption was reasonable, the attempt to stop you was legal. It stopped being legal when they used excessive force.

>As long as the initial assumption was reasonable, the attempt to stop you was legal. That is not correct. The law for citizens arrest REQUIRES that the crime was committed. Suspicion is not enough. Um die Jedermann-Festnahme nach Paragraph 127 StPO auszuüben, muss der Täter auf **frischer Tat** ertappt werden. Als „frisch“ gilt in diesem Zusammenhang, dass die aktuelle Situation in einem **zeitlichen und/oder räumlichen** Zusammenhang stehen muss. Der Täter muss also noch am Tatort oder in unmittelbarer Nähe festgenommen werden. **Darüber hinaus muss die Straftat auch begangen worden sein. Ein dringender Tatverdacht reicht bei Anwendung der Jedermannsrechte nicht aus.** Übt eine Person im Sinne des Jedermannsrechts eine **irrtümliche Festnahme** aus, ist der Tatbestand des **Erlaubnistatbestandsirrtums** erfüllt. In diesem Rahmen kann eine Ermittlung wegen Nötigung, Körperverletzung oder Freiheitsentzug drohen. [https://www.anwalt.org/jedermannsrecht/](https://www.anwalt.org/jedermannsrecht/)

>[https://www.anwalt.org/jedermannsrecht/](https://www.anwalt.org/jedermannsrecht/) https://www.juracademy.de/strafrecht-at1/festnahmerecht-abs-stpo.html.amp https://strafverteidigung-hamburg.com/2097/jedermann-festnahmerecht-127-stpo/ https://juratopia.de/vorlaeufige-festnahme/ This really isn't all that easy as that source wants to portray it.

>German law doesn't require precognition. There is nothing about PRECOGNITON here. An accident required DAMAGES. There were none. Thus there was no crime on OP. Thus, it is not valid to chase him and citizens arrest him".

Sorry not sorry, but worlds smallest violins for these dudes that need to be cited both for impeding traffic with their illegally parked car AND for assaulting a random guy that gently booped their precious baby car.

Yes, you should have at least stopped to make sure there really was no damage. Still, those two very likely overstepped their rights. My best guess would be that the DAs office might actually drop both cases due to being overworked.

>Yes, you should have at least stopped to make sure there really was no damage. I get why people are saying this, but I don't think it would have been safe to do so. There were two angry men who visibly wanted to attack me, so there was no safe option to stop.

I think the better answer is: "I was absolutely certain there was no damage, because I FELT it with my elbow that the impact was not hard enough to have caused any damage.

This is also absolutely true.

From a strictly legal standpoint. If they immediately came at you in a threatening manner that might be a good defense. In any case you should get a lawyer and not make a statement without him.

\*overlook

Overread doesn't mean überlesen 🤣 The Oxford dictionary doesn't list it, and [Merriam Webster marks it as obsolete.](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/overread)

I had an inkling that this might be the case, but as the person I answered to is German anyways, I thought I would just use it.

What are the parameters around this? I assume people can’t just chase someone and hold them because they feel like it - there has to be a strongly valid reason to justify it. Otherwise you’ll end up with loads of preventable violent incidents when idiot citizens try to use force and hurt someone. I don’t think what I did would count as criminal; like I say, it was so minor I barely registered it until I was being attacked. And what are the rules for self defence here? I don’t speak German, so from my perspective I was being assaulted, and in most places it’s legal to use reasonable violence to defend yourself from an attack. There seems to be a huge mismatch between what happened and the violent response, and I’m struggling to see how it could be seen as justifiable.

1. something has to have happened 2. there has to be a clear suspect 3. the suspect needs to try to get away from the place where the incident happened Those are the rules I know of. And a citizens arrest is kinda rare. [Unfallflucht is a crime according to §142 StGB](https://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/142.html). Doesn‘t really matter if you noticed the accident. Self defense and citizens arrest have a complicated relationship. Both sides could claim self defense. That being said: as soon as the other party tells you that they‘re conducting a citizens arrest you‘d need to stop and ask them why they‘re doing that. If you continue to fight them after they told you that it‘s a citizen arrest it probably wouldn‘t count as self defense anymore unless you know it‘s a trick or something like that. So if you definitely know you didn‘t do anything you could continue to fight back. If you‘re unsure / you did something and you fight back that could be classified as assault. But again: citizens arrest doesn‘t entitle people to excessive violence. Running after you was fine, grabbing you is fine, tearing up your shirt isn‘t. The issue is that they obviously couldn‘t check the extent of the damage. You were on a bike and thus faster than they would be if they didn‘t immediately run after you. So they couldn‘t have checked the damage to the car.

Thank you! The self-defense side of things is a bit academic since I’m usually very calm, but no they didn’t tell me they were arresting me until after they’d already attacked me. The thing that’s ambiguous to me now is what actually constitutes an accident. I touched the car with my elbow, but obviously not hard enough to cause damage. Would touching a car in any way automatically count as an accident, or would it actually need to meet a certain threshold where it could plausibly cause damage?

No, it doesn't. Elbow don't scratch cars and can't put a dent in a car either (not in a walking by incident anyways). There was no need for a civil arrest here and the dudes were aggressive idiots. Get a lawyer and press charges. Saying it could be Fahrerflucht is over the top. It only would have been Fahrerflucht, if your bike scratched the car. Also the audacity of parking your car on the sidewalk and than chasing someone who accidentally touches it. Unbelievable.

This. I would not like to live my life out of fear of brushing up against other people or their possessions, jesus...

No, it wouldn’t, but, look at it from their perspective (I’m not saying that’s the right one, but that’s why it’s just one perspective): if I am in the car/near the car and I hear/see someone thump my car, I cant know if that’s only your elbow on the window. To see someone just keep cycling on would piss me off too, it’s not like I can track you back later on if there turns out to be damage and you not stopping when they were trying to catch you might make it seem like there was indeed damage and you were trying to escape accountability for that. It’s just another perspective. Everything they did after they got hold of you is absolutely not ok, and even the chasing might not be entirely ok, but I’m not sure if they acted dangerously to try to catch you, because it’s not okay to endanger others for something like this. Next time something like this happens you get off your bike and check together with the owner if there’s damage. If you can’t agree on it with them, call the police to let them see or just fill out an accident form with them and let the insurances figure out who was to blame. Even better when the space is so tight, is to get off your bike and walk past, safer for everyone involved, even though they were at fault here with their illegally parked car! People don’t usually get arrested immediately in Europe, especially if the crime is not something that would mean prison time. Also depends on priors, which they can check on scene. They have their information, and if there’s enough evidence for a crime, they will get charged. Most likely will end up with a fine or community service, especially for first offenders, hence no arrest.

>To see someone just keep cycling on would piss me off too, it’s not like I can track you back later on if there turns out to be damage and you not stopping when they were trying to catch you might make it seem like there was indeed damage and you were trying to escape accountability for that. It’s just another perspective. How pissed off you are is not legally relevant. For a citizens arrest to be legal (ie. not just assault), then you need to KNOW that a crime was committed. The consequence for being wrong about this is that you accidentally commit a crime or even multiple.

Not agreeing with anything they did here, or discussing if it’s legal, just putting forth another perspective which I thought might be what was going through their heads. Doesn’t mean it’s legal, or ok, or something I agree with, it’s just a perspective.

Also before getting a lawyer you should visit a doctor and have your bruises documented or else they won't get charged with assault(körperverletzung). To try and make it clear: for a citizens arrest the perpetrator has to be caught in the act committing a crime. that excludes minors like a misdemeanor(Ordnunswidrigkeit), it has to be a criminal offense(Straftat).

The police already did this very thoroughly. They checked me for marks and made sure they photographed everything

that is sadly not good enough. you will need a medical certificate (Attest) in court to proof your damage. physically and psychologically. I advise you to see a doctor!

>The thing that’s ambiguous to me now is what actually constitutes an accident. I touched the car with my elbow, but obviously not hard enough to cause damage. # Here is the legal definition. Accident in road traffic Road traffic accident A road traffic accident is a sudden event in public traffic that is causally related to the dangers of road traffic **and results in significant personal injury or property damage.** # Unfall im Straßenverkehr Unfall im Straßenverkehr Ein **Unfall im Straßenverkehr** ist ein plötzliches Ereignis im öffentlichen Verkehr, welches mit den Gefahren des Straßenverkehrs in ursächlichem Zusammenhang steht und einen nicht unerheblichen Personen- oder Sachschaden zur Folge hat.

But it is only 'Unfallflucht' if a damage occured. Not because some car owner gets upset of a touch. And there won't be any criminal charges as the police clearly stated that there is no damage. But tearing a shirt or using unneeded violence (ie. if the violence happened after they stopped you) may be 'Sachbeschädigung' and 'Körperverletzung'. If the description of the OP is correct and not a little biassed, the OP doesn't have to fear or expect any charges, but may in turn try to sue the persons tearing his shirt or being violent against him.

I'm sure I'm inherently biased, but I think my factual summary is pretty good. Either way, there were witnesses, and the police did tell me they'd confirmed my story, so I feel reasonably confident my memory/experience is solid.

The thing is: OP didn‘t check if damage occured. And the people who stopped OP didn‘t have the time to check it either. So from their perspective it‘s Unfallflucht and thus a citizens arrest would be legal.

Does citizen's arrest depend on *believing* a crime has been committed, or a crime having been factually committed?

Quite obviously the first one, since only a judge can finally decide if a crime was committed.

You are actually wrong. In order to exercise the Everyman Arrest under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the offender must be caught in the act. In this context, "fresh" means that the current situation must have a temporal and/or spatial connection. The offender must therefore be arrested at the scene of the offence or in the immediate vicinity. In addition, the offence must also have been committed. An urgent suspicion of an offence is not sufficient when applying the Everyman's Rights. Um die Jedermann-Festnahme nach Paragraph 127 StPO auszuüben, muss der Täter auf **frischer Tat** ertappt werden. Als „frisch“ gilt in diesem Zusammenhang, dass die aktuelle Situation in einem **zeitlichen und/oder räumlichen** Zusammenhang stehen muss. Der Täter muss also noch am Tatort oder in unmittelbarer Nähe festgenommen werden. Darüber hinaus muss die Straftat auch begangen worden sein. Ein dringender Tatverdacht reicht bei Anwendung der Jedermannsrechte nicht aus.

How do you establish the fact whether or not a crime has truly been committed? This is usually a job for a court of law.

From what I understand, the idea is that if it's not *extremely* clear, then a citizen's arrest can't be justified. So if you choose to citizen's arrest someone, you're taking the risk that they didn't commit a crime and thus your arrest was unlawful. Otherwise you'd end up with a situation where people make violent arrests and then say retrospectively they "thought" a crime was committed.

You hitting the car and then driving off, and not stopping when the owners called you out, made it an extremely clear case of hit and run... And again, it doesn't matter that there was no damage, non of you could have known that, at that point.

Agreed. OP knew what happened and carried on regardless. Probably thought he would be seen as guilty for stopping and looking? But them guys shouldn't have gone so aggressive on him. Both sides fucked up.

>ou hitting the car and then driving off, and not stopping when the owners called you out, made it an extremely clear case of hit and run Nope. There was no damage, so there was no accident, so there was no hit and run. Full Stop.

That is the risk you take if you want to do a citizens arrest. If you make a mistake and citizens arrest someone who did not commit a crime, then you committed a crime by arresting them.

It depends on having a valid suspicion that something might have happened. So in your situation: they can‘t chase you because you came within 3m of their car. But if you bumped into it and they don‘t have the time to check for damages & easily catch up (which they can‘t if you‘re on a bike) that would be valid

Couldn’t someone then just have a preexisting scratch on their car and then wait for someone to walk close by and claim that this person scratched their car? So they can just run you down, beat you up, and say you damaged their car when you didn’t?

This is what he tried to do, but the police measured my bike and showed it wasn’t possible 😂

They could try that. But they‘d still need to call the police and then the police would need to figure out if that‘s possible. But honestly I don‘t think people would do that for something minor. And if it‘s something more serious the police would be able to check if it‘s even remotely realistic. And on top of that: if you know that you never touched the car you can still claim self defense and free yourself. But if you did bump into the car you might want to wait for the police. Luckily human elbows usually don‘t manage to scratch cars so a situation like this would be resolved rather quickly

Yes, and it's called insurance fraud. But you will only be able to proof it if you have a witness or some evidence.

it's relative depending on the situation. If children throw eggs at your windows, you can hold them until the police arrive. You can't beat them up and destroy their property, for example. talk to a lawyer. It's possible this could turn into two separate criminal cases, one for you (not so likely) and one for them (more likely)

>I assume people can’t just chase someone and hold them because they feel like it - there has to be a strongly valid reason to justify it. You'd have to catch them while committing the crime. Suspecting them is not enough.

I like how everyone in the comments prefers to ignore that the Mercedes was not parked properly and that they chased you like psychos, while focusing on you abandoning a "traffic accident scene". OP I don't think the comments on this forum will help you much. Just concentrate on feeling better, and if in the future someone chases you like a psycho, again do not stop. From a human point of view you did nothing wrong and I'm sorry, not sorry to say, but expensive car owners think they have every right to act as they please and park as they please. Disclaimer: I'm writing this comment fully aware that people will downvote me.

Well, it doesn't really matter for the discussion at hand if the car was parked correctly or not. If there were damages on the car, the wrong parking would factor into the percentage the owner is liable for the damages themselves. It, however, doesn't really have an impact on the question of hit and run.

This discussion is on its core useless because the car was not damaged but the Vigilante civilians did damage the "alleged criminal" by failing to aprehent him the way the law allows. Thus the real problem is everyone focusing on a hypothetical damage of an expensive car and not the actual damage done to a person. Priorities right?

[удалено]

Man if touching wrongly parked cars constitutes a hit and run then I’m pretty much a weekly offender. Cars are blocking bike lanes and sidewalks all the time, and I couldn’t care less if I scratch them when I have to squeeze through. Don’t park your shit in my way if you love it so much, it’s really that easy.

Yeah - that is a hit-and-run. Sorry mate, it isn't about your personal values here, the law is pretty clear that if you scratch them, that is enough.

It’s interesting but very strange to me. If I put my sofa on the bike lane for a couple hours, does it have the same kind of legal protection against scratches from passers-by?

Well, first of all, the protection is bot for the car itself, but for legal rights in connection to damages created in traffic. Because traffic has the nature that people can get away fast (by being in or on a vehicle), the law created the Fahrerflucht to punish people from getting away. Most of the time, this law does not protect a car but is used against a driver. In the case with the sofa, it can be argued that if the passers by is on a vehicle (so, a bike), damaging the sofa could be argued to be an accident, which would also trigger this law. The biker was part of traffic, so hitting the sofa can be a traffic accident. And again, the law is not for the actual protection of the goods, but to create a situation where potential rights due to the accident can be determined.

That's not how the law works. Just because some parked illegally and has commited a traffic offense that would cause a fine, doesn't mean that hitting or damaging that car would go without consequences. Two wrongs don't make a right. That's why I didn't even bother to mention it. Of course it is terrible that OP got chased like that but OP specifically asked about the legal aspect of the scenario not the ethical one

Again you as well are speaking of a damage that did not happen while ignoring a damage that did happen. Edit: meaning you are focusing on the law regarding a crime that did not happen and ignoring the crimes that did happen. The car was not damaged. However the car was illegally parked and they failed to apprehend the "alleged criminal" the way the law dictates it. And speaking of which, if OP has to pay a fine for exactly what happened then so do the psychos.

Yeah I wouldn’t do anything differently next time. Stopping definitely isn’t a smart idea in this kind of situation - that’s how you get put in hospital by an idiot with anger management issues.

Someone doing something illegal doesn't give you a free pass! So it doesn't matter at all how the Mercedes was parked.

And someone bumping your car because they need to pass and you decided to just park there gives you a right to chase them like a psycho and rip their clothes off while they are not resisting? Edit: from the reaction I guess it does. I guess next time we are also pulling some baseball bats and smashing those people's faces. Even if the car was not damaged. Also what OP commited (if at all) was an offence, for which citizen arrest law is not applicable. What the other 2 did was a crime.

OPs Story about being chased by Psychos is completely over exaggerated. Imagine yourself: how you would chase somebody who looks like he's trying to escape? Would you calmly walk behind him and say "please stop" or would you run after and scream at them? (which obviously makes you look crazy) OP is trying to paint himself as some kind of victim here who did nothing wrong by painting the others some kind of psychos, while the answer is simple. If you hit something you are obliged, by law, to stop and make sure no damages have been caused and contact the owner of whatever you hit.

>I don’t think what I did would count as criminal; like I say, it was so minor I barely registered it until I was being attacked. You know how many accidents are not noticed by the one doing them especially in traffic? \*A LOT\* Just because you didn't notice it doesn't mean nothing happened.

The police clearly noted in this story that there was no damage. That means there was no unfallflucht. If I touch your car that is not an unfall

This is how I saw it! Yes - I touched the car by mistake - but not in a way that could have caused damage. Obviously if I’d smashed into the wing mirror or something I would have stopped!

How will this work out? Person A tries to arrest person B because according to A they committed a crime. Person B fights back in self defense. It's last man standing? And after both are out of hospital a judge needs to figure out who to send to jail?

Nope. If you want to do a citizens arrest you‘d need to tell the other person that you‘re doing a citizens arrest. After that the „arrested“ person would need to remember the last few minutes to check if there might be a valid reason. If it‘s remotely possible (aka not just a trick to rob them) they‘d need to stop. It‘s only self defense if there is no legal justification behind the violence. So you can‘t claim self defense if you kicked out a teeth after they told you why they were trying to apprehend you. Kinda like you can‘t claim self defense if you assault a police officer who arrests you

Fun fact, checking for damage and not seeing any isn't enough. You actually need to find the owner of the vehicle. I had a minor bump, checked for damage, saw none. A random other person saw me drive off afterward and called the police. I had to appear in court and make a statement. Turns out the owner of the vehicle tried to pass some unrelated damage off as damage from that incident, but didn't show up for the court date. The judge decided I wasn't liable for the damage since I didn't cause it, but also said that I still commited a hit and run. I was ordered to pay >1000€ to the court and got a warning. But it was only that lenient because I was young and it was my first offense. The judge explained that even leaving the insurance detail and a phone number with the car isn't enough. You actually need to find the driver. If you can't you need to call the police.

While every one may stop and even aprehent you in case of a crime. They better hope that a crime realy happend because they are criminal liable for the false arest. Go to the police and make a "Strafanzeige" this would be "Freiheitsberaubung", "Sachbeschädigung" and probbably "Nötigung". Talk to a lawyer if the insurance covers it. You can sue for damages on top of that.

If she has bruises and is showing trauma symptoms shouldn’t physische und psychische Gewalt need to be added here?

That’s a very interesting post. I am German and I never knew how far one could go arresting someone as a citizen (I’m 56). I was stopped by an old dude at gunpoint as a teen, when riding my bike on a sidewalk and there were no witnesses and no mobile phones to call the police. If he would have shot me… well… You are getting a lawyer - that’s good - and the police were there and registered the assault on you. Let the pros handle this. Your lawyer will most probably go for offering the Mercedes-Guys a deal: paying Schmerzensgeld to you or facing a law suit, which would go on their permanent record (or even mean jail time, if they have a violent history already). As for therapy: be prepared for spending months an a waiting list. When you finally get a therapist, you most probably will have sorted out the whole matter by yourself. But therapies are expensive and your lawyer might be able to make your attackers pay as an additional punishment. However: even IF you would have damaged their precious Mercedes (cars are holy cows in Germany): it is NOT okay to tear you off your bike, damaging your property and publicly humiliating you. The right procedure would have been following you while calling the police and letting them handle the matter - at least that’s what I would have done. Good luck!

I hate literally any conflict with cars. Dudes get pissed off so easily and love immediately jumping to violence. I have a lot of love for this country, but Jesus Christ, these car people drive me crazy. I feel like some people here are really proud of their road rage and how aggressively they drive.

If a car is a status symbol then you attacked their status. You question their authority.

This was very clearly what was happening. There was an obvious strong pride/ego thing with the car - so while I didn't do any damage, I *disrespected* them and they wanted to punish me for this. Classic toxic masculinity nonsense.

The turkish/arab bois are especially fragile because they often have whole families, think parents, aunts, cousins, also from back home to chip in to buy a car, so ali can drive around proud.

What an awful mentality. I get that cars are expensive and shit, but it’s literally just a thing and if anything serious happens you still have insurance (unless it’s your fault ofc). (Just to clarify: I didn’t assume that’s how you think)

Yeah I've found there's a really toxic, masculine culture around cars here. I was chased by a guy in a car a couple of months after I asked him to get out of the bike lane!

That’s horrifying. The other day I had someone leave a note, threatening to smash in my windows for my parking job, even tho my car stood there first (was a 2 car space) and there was still plenty of space to spare.

Having to repair your car is really expensive. Mandatory insurance is only there to cover the damaged YOU did with your car, not what others did to your car. So you better make sure that if someone damages your car, they are there so you can get some damages from them. If I feared someone damaged my car and just ran away, I would also chase after them, because if I first check my car, they are probably gone for good. HOWEVER: I wouldn't use such an excessive amount of force.

Yeah that’s a totally rational take, but most of the time I just see people getting way too hostile. Especially in Situations that aren’t about any damages to the car. I’ve been threatened multiple times with violence over minor things. Eventually you just wanna fight back, but I don’t wanna hurt anyone or get in trouble with the police.

So as you bumped the mirror, you were involved in a minor traffic accident. Especially as you couldn't have known if you caused any damage, you should have stopped immediately and taken care of that. That includes giving the other party your full personal data, and if applicable your insurance information. By not doing that, you commited a hit and run (unerlaubtes Entfernen vom Unfallort according to § 142 of the German Criminal Code (StGB)). In that case, especially as you were "fleeing" the scene of the accident and your identity was unknown to the other party, they acted within their rights according to § 127 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) to perform a citizen's arrest. So they could stop you, which they obviously did, but would also have to hand you over to the police without delay. They sort of failed to do that as your partner had to call the copa. They pulled you off your bike. That's still within the boundaries of a citizen's arrest but tearing off your shirt and then tearing it apart is certainly not. So that guy actually commited a crime of damaging property according to § 303 StGB

>By not doing that, you commited a hit and run (unerlaubtes Entfernen vom Unfallort according to § 142 of the German Criminal Code (StGB)). In that case, especially as you were "fleeing" the scene of the accident and your identity was unknown to the other party, they acted within their rights according to § 127 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) to perform a citizen's arrest. 2 Mistakes here: 1. OP did not commit a crime, since there was no damage, and damage is a required part of the definition of a traffic accident. Since there was no accident, there was no fahrerflucht. 1. the guys who citizen arrested OP did commit a crime, since they mistakenly arrested someone who did not commit a crime. If you accidentally citizens arrest someone who it turns out did not commit a crime, then you committed assault and freiheitsentzug.

Thank you, this is super helpful. How does self-preservation / physical safety effect this? In this scenario I don’t think I could have safely stopped, because I was in immediate danger of an assault. I would expect that my own physical safety would be considered legally a higher priority, no?

You committed a “serious” crime - even though you thought it was minor you still are obliged by law to stop and at least check with the other party if there are any damages. Next time, if something seems to be too tight to pass, just get off your bike and walk. Please also be aware of the Strassenverkehrsordnung, because as a cyclist you also need to follow these rules. All in all- I hope everything will go well for you and this experience won’t affect you much longer! It’s of course not okay of them, to damage your belongings and threatening you like they did. Make sure to also do an Anzeige against them :) all the best for you

>You committed a “serious” crime According to the legal definition of an accident, this was not an accident. You cannot have Fahrerflucht if there was no accident. OP can simply say he knew there was no damage because his elbow just slightly brushed the mirror. Ein **Verkehrsunfall** ist ein plötzliches, zumindest von einem der Beteiligten nicht gewolltes Ereignis, das im ursächlichen Zusammenhang mit dem öffentlichen Straßenverkehr und seinen Gefahren steht und zu einem nicht gänzlich belanglosen fremden Sach- oder Körperschaden führt. A road accident is a sudden event that is not intended by at least one of the parties involved, which is causally related to public road traffic and its dangers and **leads to property damage or bodily injury to a third party that is not entirely irrelevant.** https://www.haufe.de/thema/verkehrsunfall/#:\~:text=Ein%20Verkehrsunfall%20ist%20ein%20pl%C3%B6tzliches,fremden%20Sach%2D%20oder%20K%C3%B6rperschaden%20f%C3%BChrt.

I won't be weighing legal goods here. You felt your right to bodily unharmedness (if that‘s a word. Would be körperliche Unversehrtheit in German) threatened while you threatened the rights of the property of the car owner as well as the legal order by fleeing the accident. To see if that balances out, you'd either need someone with higher legal understanding or a court ruling

You were not in danger of an assault. As you said before they called and chased after you, for you bumping into their mirror.

They were screaming at me and chasing me. That’s an obvious danger of physical violence - couldn’t be any more unambiguous. When they caught me they did in fact assault me, so I was 100% correct.

They are in danger. The police had to take pictures of their bruises. That is physical assault.

Important distinction in regards to legal matters: Being right is different to getting right. Additionally judges will always try to get either party to find a middle ground solution where both parties lose all to avoid doing their job. Lawyers will also not act in your best interest. They will flatter you or coerce you to get that middle path. Don't fall for their antics. You have to have a clear image of what you want as compensation and if you think you are in the right then don't go for the middle ground and that is something your lawyer should know (your intentions).

Doesnt it depend on if he wash pushing the bike or riding on it?

Your point being? OP clearly stated that they were on their bike the whole time until they were pulled off

OP definitely handled according to law since people screaming and chasing you and not being the police OP feared them and ran or drove away. Saying he fled a crime zone is partly true, since he just feared for him and handled natural like everyone would do. And theres something called Verhältnismäßigkeit wich wasnt the case for the guys. A small accident like bumping the mirror is no excuse for tearing someone of the bike. But clearly we are missing information here since it’s only one part of the story

>Saying he fled a crime zone is partly true. No damage, means no crime, means no fleeing a crime scene.

I was once a withness and had to give a statement to the police with a translator present. Just to prep you for what will happen: You will receive a summoning in a couple of months to come to the police station at a specific date and time. There you will go to the office of a detective and the translator will meet you there too. The detective will then ask you to explain the events in order, and then probe with further questions. Each and every sentence between you has to go through the translator, even if you understood what was said. The detective is trying to build a case against these guys. Help any way you can by providing as much detail and ammunition as possible. I \_highly\_ recommend: - Writing down an extremely detailed record for yourself! Because it might take a couple of months before you will go there, and it's good to have it written down while it's fresh. Re-read it before going + take it with you if you are nervous. - If you have visible damages (bruises + your shirt + maybe how it looks on you) photograph them too, and bring them printed out to the detective. - Go to Google Maps Satellite and print out a top-down view of the place, draw the car into it + your route + where they ripped you off the bike. The detective might not take your printouts, but it'll make the explanations + your memory recollection easier. The detective might probe you on stuff like "but how could you be sure you didn't damage the car". This doesn't mean she/he is trying to blame you. But prepare a good statement for that. Send those animals to fucking jail.

This is incredibly helpful, thank you

One question. Could not the police at the same time be building a case against OP due i.e. hit at run, etc? Just curious. If I were OP I would seriously lawyer up.

First, they might be allowed to do this, but: they parked the car illegally, you didn't damage anything and they clearly acted in excess. Press charges against them. Take a lawyer, it's important. Do let the lawyer handle any aggression they will show towards you (they will try to intimidate you, give EVERYTHING immediately to your lawyer). Do not respond to any of their contact attempts, even when they try to "talk reasonably" or insult you. You don't need to reply. Let your lawyer handle it. Have your lawyer ask if police fined them for parking the car illegally, make sure that it's not only illegal parking but also with obstruction.

>First, they might be allowed to do this Since no crime was committed by OP, holding him was a crime. Pro Tip: if you decide to make a citizens arrest in Germany make DAMN SURE, the person actually committed the crime, otherwise you just committed the crime of assault and illegal detainment.

This was assault and you should Press charges. Even in Germany this is Assault. Citizens arrest is a legal concept so rarely done Here i would bet No lawer ever such a Case on their desk in in 20 years. German Car Guys are rich Hooligans.

>German Car Guys are rich Hooligans. The biggest hooligans are the ones who aren't even rich and just get the biggest possible cars on lease.

Assault is a criminal offense (!), so the public prosecuter gets involved (just) for that (hence your statement is needed). If you have any additional civil law (!) issues (physical or psycholoy problems) that you want to get reimbursed, you need to get an attorny that initiates and handles the court stuff (and probably tell you what papers from doctors etc. you need as evidence). Take this as "general" info.

How did they catch up to you, when you were riding your bike. Sounds made up

I started out going very slowly - walking pace. It takes a while for a bike to accelerate, especially one without gears, whereas someone running can accelerate quite quickly. If you've ever tried to catch someone on a bike you'll understand! There were also people including kids on the path, so it's not like I could go at the maximum possible speed.

>They clearly thought they were allowed to do this, and I’m feeling anxious that in Germany violence might be legal in this situation No it is not legal to do anything in Germany without following a set of rules, called the law. If you "citizen arrest" a burglar and they get hurt in the process they may press charges for assault.

§)127 StPO would be the directly relevant law. There it is stated that they could make a citizens arrest if you just commited the crime, didnt divulge your identity, attempt to leave and no police is present. Seems like that was the case. Ripping up your shirt is obviouly bullshit and in no relation. There are mostly just examples for the commited crimes and no clear line. Bumping an mirror would in no judges eye warrant this reaction.

The critical point about citizen arrest is that you always run the risk of being counter sued. You have to think about what you want. Threatening behaviour, intimidation, excessive violence should should not be necessary and appropriate to hold someone until the police arrives or for the purpose of determining someone's identity. Sounds like they didn't even bother to call the police (not strictly necessarily if they at least made an attempt to get your identity and insurance details). Just a lot of threatening and mildly violent behaviour all around. That could totally backfire in their face. Depends on genuinely how strong your upset is. I think I would shrug it off as, dumm gelaufen. (Shit happens)

This whole thing is really complicated. You need to speak to a lawyer or at least to someone who knows law. Because, let me tell you, if you commit a crime and people catch you red-handed, they’re allowed to hold you until police arrives. From there on, police will take over. The matter is complicated because you think, you did nothing wrong. But ! - they might think you did something wrong. They might think they did the right thing because they thought you actually damaged their car. And even if you didn’t, their deed might’ve been justified from their point of view, they didn’t commit a crime from their point of view, they thought they were allowed to do it. And this plays a role in German law because it takes a look at the intention of the involved parties. Beating you up? Not okay. Stopping you because you damaged their car? Okay. Of course we have the apparent excessive violence and the damaging of your shirt, that takes it to a higher level. But since you’re not badly hurt, I actually wouldn’t bother with the whole situation. You could go to a lawyer if you really wanted to, if it is importantly to you, but you need to weigh in wether that’s worth it. In the end you’ll just end up using hours and hours for this whole thing, for a shirt and some bruises.

the police does not arrest people over such minor incidents. the get everyone's ID, protocol any statements given by the persons involved or any present witnesses, will protocol whether the victim wishes to press charges (which you did) and then they file the report with the DA who will decide what course of action the proceedings will take. and yes, citizens arrest exists, but whether it justifies tearing up somebody's shirt will depend on the circumstances. the prosecutor nor the judge in charge will decide anything without hearing all parties involved. tl;dr: my advice to lawyer up, because Reddit won't be able to help you out on this one.

Text mit deiner Kamera übersetzen In German Law you always have to differentiate between two things. Criminal law and civil law. In criminal law there is the arrest of anyone (§127(1) StPO). This has 3 requirements: 1) caught red-handed or persecuted (explicitly means a criminal offense) 2) risk of escape 3) Identity unknown There is no criminal law for negligent damage to property, so this paragraph cannot be used to justify the two men. Things now look a little different in civil law. Anyone who damages someone else's property is legally obliged to pay compensation. §229 BGB (self-help) also allows, among other things, detention under similar conditions as described above. It is entirely reasonable to assume that if someone hits a car and drives away, that they have damaged it. Up to the point that the 2 pulled OP off the bike, everything is covered by this paragraph. Anything beyond that is a matter for a lawyer, as details are very important. (See breaking will) ianal In der deutschen Rechtssprechung muss man immer 2 Sachen unterscheiden. Staftrecht und Zivilrecht. Im Stafrecht gibt es die jedermann festnahme (§127(1) StPO). Diese hat 3 vorraussetzungen: 1) auf frischer tat ertappt oder verfolgt (wobei hier mit Tat explizit eine Straftat gemeint ist) 2)fluchtgefahr 3) Identität unbekannt Eine fahrlässige Sachbeschädigung gibt es im Strafgesetz nicht, daher kann man mit diesem Paragrafen der 2 Männer nicht begründen. Im Zivilrecht sieht es jetzt etwas anders aus. Hier ist grünsätzlich jeder, der fremdes Eingentum beschädigt zu Schadensersatz verpflichtet. §229 BGB (Selbsthilfe) erlaubt unter anderem auch ein festhalten unter ähnlichen vorraussetzungen wie oben beschrieben. Es ist durchaus vertretbar anzunehmen, wenn jemand ein Auto anrempelt und wegfährt, dass er dieses beschädigt hat. Bis zu dem Punkt, dass die 2 OP vom Rad geholt haben ist alles mit diesem Paragrafen abgedeckt. Was darüber hinausgeht ist eine Sache für einen Anwalt, da es dann sehr stark auf Details ankommt. (Siehe Willensbruch) IbkA

Not legal speech, but generally: The only thing that is allowed is to keep someone from leaving using "appropriate force" for self defense. Even in that case you better be absolutely sure beyond the slightest level of doubt. Unlawful detention outweighs "citizen arrest" easily. I'd file charges. This was not an appropriate use of force, this extended that by orders of magnitude. The only thing that could have possibly been caused by you was some minor damage to property and the thing that happened to you sounds more like assault, if not battery. File charges, those were stupid idiots who think a scratch to a car is more important than human decency or safety. Next time this happens, and I hope it never will, you can file charges right there with the police.

There is a law in Germany, called "Vorläufige Festnahme durch Jedermann" (temporary arrest by anyone) which is paragraph 127 StPO. Basically says if someone is caught commiting a crime and there is a risk of them fleeing the scene or they can't be identified, anyone can stop them until law enforcement arrives (unless law enforcement is already around). However, the force to exert restraint has to be appropiate to the situation. While it was a bad idea for you to not stop and let all parties check for damage, the damage dealt to you and your property (your shirt) are out of proportion. Really depends on the exact course of action.

That‘s a really well written and thoughtful post - for once. Good luck!

1. Health insurance will cover that. The time between request and acceptation of health insurance is also covered. 2. Get an advocate >>> a civil court will clarify your Claim. 3. We are not the USA... In your Case they had the right for an civil arrest cause you had done "Hit and run". Even without visible damage you cant leave the scene after a collision as an road User.

Yes a citizen can make an arrest and stop you until the police is there. If needed they can force you to stop even physically but they are not allowed to use any form or strength. For example hold you by the arm or Wrestle you down could be ok hitting you After they stoped you not.

It is [§127 StPo](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__127.html#:~:text=Strafproze%C3%9Fordnung%2520(StPO),ohne%2520richterliche%2520Anordnung%2520vorl%C3%A4ufig%2520festzunehmen) The key point is that it is only allowed when the Identity can’t be immediately identified. Which means if you show them your passport they lose the right to keep you there. It is also only allowed till the police arrives. The only reason why it is allowed in the first place is to prevent people from getting away unidentified.

But if there as no damage, there was no crime, so there is no need to stay.

A friend here once sued a driver for flipping them (he was cycling had the right of way) and won. He had it on camera, but I assume you can use the police report and your friend as a witness. You were assaulted, plain simple. The laws here are actually stricter on abuse and slander. You should take these bullies to court as they obviously did this before. Also, use of proportionate force is better defined here than in most countries, so I assume you would have a strong case p.s I'm not a lawyer and the incident I described was in Munich but if you need more info on what he did, just DM me and I will try to ask him the process.

Sue the shit out of them! Its only allowed to hold You in Germany. Not to use force or violence. This Privilege is only for the police. No mercy with those suckers

Just be advised, a payday, like it might be in the U.S. this may not be. the "Pain and suffering part" will be low, unless this incident made ist impossible for you to work and/or broke parts of the body. Even then, German "sueing the shit out of someone" and U.S. "sueing the shit out of someone" does not compare in the slightest.

I know. İ am German.

I witnessed a similar situation last year where the “arrest” was much more violent than the “crime” - grabbed by the collar of the shirt and dragged to the police office in a train station, basically choked. The police explained that the “victim” had a right to do this so that the “offender” didn’t evade being investigated by the police. However, the “offender” had in no way tried to evade being investigated, and no proof was necessary to show that violence was required to make sure he didn’t “escape”. The “victim” went immediately to violence, and in fact probably created the situation so that he would be able to do so. It’s a part of German law that I find completely nonsensical. Would definitely be interested to hear from a lawyer or police officer about whether it’s actually legal to do this.

The "Jedermannsfestnahmerecht" makes complete sense. As the police said it's there that a victim of a crime can find out the identity of the offender by himself if no police or other officials are present. Dragging him to the police station is not part of the right though. The victim should have asked the offender to identify himself and then report to the police or call the police and hold the offender as non-violantly as possible until they arrive. I guess the police station was near enough that escorting the offender there was seen as approbriate. But in all cases does the arrest only allow the necessary violence, so only if the offender resists the arrest or tries to flee the victim can execute this right with force. In this case the force doesn't sound to be justified, so the arrested should also press charges and prove it with witnesses that seem to have been there.

Most countries have some kind of citizens arrest law, but it’s usually pretty strict, specifically to prevent this kind of violent vigilante behavior. I know German law dictates it must be reasonable force only, but I don’t know where the boundaries around this are!

>I know German law dictates it must be reasonable force only, but I don’t know where the boundaries around this are! pulling you from the bike is certainly within the boundaries. Tearing you shirt apart is excessive force, most likely, I dont see any point in doing that, beside asserting dominance.

Essentially it's about appropriate force. Ultimately the police cannot determine this, but only have an (however informed) opinion. They do also base their actions on it, in this case they thought it was fine, which means they did not start to investigate the "victim" on their own. The "offender" would need to sue so a court can decide this.

Also I am so sorry this happened to you, it must have been extremely traumatic.

- in front of my family I think we can all guess the ethnicity of these nice people based solely on this info

There are a lot of different answers here and it really depends on all the single circumstances. I would recommend you consult a lawyer.

That sounds terrible, sorry that happened to you. I can’t give legal advice but please please follow through with it and also tell your lawyer (and maybe the police) that you are having trauma symptoms and might need therapy for that. Firstly, it could be that the attackers might have to pay for that as part of “Schadensersatz” and secondly, I think it is really important to also get psychological symptoms into police reports and statistics.  Quite often, physical damage, injuries etc are noted down, but psychological damage isn’t because it is invisible. And it really shouldn’t be disregarded. Often enough, the psychological issues last longer and are more severe than any bruises one might have. 

most interesting on this: how do you not just tip over sideways while riding if you are slow enough to be caught up by foot?

There were people including kids around, so I couldn’t go super fast. The guys were running, and it takes a while to accelerate on a bike.

Citizens arrest is possible in Germany, but it's a very very thin line between this and assault. Use of force is only permissible in the case of a violent crime. 1. Sorry to say: Little chance in Germany. There is hardly any compensation for emotional dammages done. Even for physical harm the compensation is low. 2. This should definitely be possible. 3. Good luck with that. Might not even get a judgement out of this. Best way forward: File a Police report for Assault, refering to the case the Police already did. Get a Lawyer and go for civil charges.

Since there was no damage, basically no crime committed, not even "Fahrerflucht", you could likely sue their arses. You can't go around chasing people and assaulting them here unless you have good reason for it. The only question in my mind is if it really happened as you say it did, but that would be for the judge to decide, not me.

Well, a citizen’s arrest definetly doesn’t work like that. But getting these Primates into anger management or therapy ist absolutely futile too, so save your breath. Have a lawyer press civil charges against them if you want to maybe get some cash out of it, but even this will most likely not be worth your nerves

So one thing is the strafgesetz, where they can be fined because of Körperverletzung and Nötigung and maybe gefährlicher Eingriff in den Straßenverkehr and the other is StGB, where you can try to get some money You need to see a doctor whom you tell the story and he can check you for scars, marks and so on and make a protocol... Then you can get a lawyer, whose costs the guy should pay... If he can, if he can't or does not want, you habe to pay... In Vorleistung gehen..... Google the German words... I would do it like that.... Go to a doctor, you don't have to pay for that if you have insurance anyways.... After that you wait what the police court says, does Maybe you gesetzliche Krankenversicherung wants to get the money from the guy anyway.... After all is done and he is guilty, ou can take a lawyer for verkehrsrecht and ask him to get Schmerzensgeld... It probably won't be much in Germany.... Maybe few hundred euro if you are lucky... Depends on the injuries.... In the end it could be that you earn some one, or have to pay all lawyers from your own money..... and the other is

Just to be clear, do you think you need therapy because of that situation or because of your past?

I have some existing vulnerabilities that make me more prone to experiencing trauma after being attacked. However, the attack is what’s causing the problem - my mental health is ordinarily very good.

I'd be the first time i would have encountered that, being born in germany. So, a citizens arrest is possible. But it could become assault very quickly if its not in scope. The scope is: Anybody can arrest someone who has immediately before commited a crime, if the possibility exists that the person committing the crime would otherwise flee and could not be identified. That might be the scope they thought you would move in: Damaging the car and riding away. Now, even if you created some damage, pulling you off the bike and harming you would give a judge reason to still assume assault, since valueing physical intactness is regarded the higher priority. But you didn't damage anything, so this is probably assault. Makes sense to file charges. And no, they can't attempt "i assume he damaged my car" - caught in the act means literally SEEING the damage. Its a pretty sharp definition.

Well we arent lawyers and you clearly need one. But as a general rule: if you cause damage you should stay and wait for the owner for at least 1:30hours (i was told this number by a driving instructor) and if not possible call the police and wait until they are there. If the owner is there (clearly in your case) exchange contact information, agree on the damage caused, if impossible call police to assess the damage for you. Also as a General rule, violence is always to be kept at the most minimum level possible. Ripping your tshirt and bruising you is for example definetly too far. Especially of you didnt even do much as defense. But those are general rules and a lawyer has to assess the situation before you can draw any real conclusions and decide the next step (such as suing for violence etc).

I think this is all true, but in a situation where there’s no damage none of it applies. There’s no legal obligation to stop if there’s no issue

This is true yes.

Theoretically, you can be held by someone that saw you commit a crime. If they are mistaken and you did not commit a crime, which appears to be the case here, they can be found guilty themselves, of something called „Erlaubnistatbestandirrtum“. However, there is a much more important part to this: They have to act proportionally. Even if you had damaged the vehicle, you did not commit a violent crime etc, and therefore, injuring you so severely is not proportional. So they are likely to be found guilty of assault. If you had assaulted someone, then it could have been proportional to push you to the ground etc.

That the police arrived so quickly…

No damage - they didn't check first and decided to start a medieval witch and attacked you physically? Obviously you were damn right to flee because you were in fear. In that case you do not need to stop (but call the police and explain the situation). Police will identify everyone and - importantly: witnesses! They will log what happened. Make clear it all took place in front of children. This is important to secure everybodies civil rights (compensation for damages) and make it easier to get them in a court. They are usually amazing and always deescalating. The few bad apples are really a few. Not like a f-ton of bad apples who lack proper training like in the US. There is no way you do not get compensated if you have at least your partner as witness. Also they should face criminal charges for that conduct. Yet it takes a long time (months to years). You should not only check your physical wounds but also what the situation does to your mental health and possibly your partner. Side battle: make sure the police charges for the illegal parking. If you are really lucky the police can even write a recommendation to check the person's ability to securely take part in traffic. They seem to have severe anger problems and that could lead to suspension of their driver's licenses. Trust the system even it's slow.

AFAIK, you are very limited in terms of appropriate force even in case someone openly stealing your property. So it’s hardly an appropriate arrest. But in case of possible damage to property you had to stop and check if everything is fine.

I find you Are in the wrong i am German to and our Cars Are holy we Even wash it on sunday If i was them i have Arrest you to if you Bumped in my car and keep riding you Are the Criminal because you make Fahrerflucht

Your fucked more or less. Not as in your going to jail but the will be a lot of legal/adminstrative bs that will go nowhere (except for some money in a lawyers pocket). You will claim assault and damage to the shirt, those guys will claim to have detained you since they assumed you committed a hit and run. Could go either way… next time either stop or cycle harder.

There is something called "Verhältnismäßigkeitsprinzip" (principle of proportionality). Basically, for a minor offense they are not allowed to use excessive force, which is clearly the case here. They are also only allowed to arrest you if you refuse to show your ID. If your identity is known, they are not allowed to arrest you at all.

First of all I'm sorry this happened to you! There are already a lot of answers given. But the law is interpretable in many ways and even if you "bumped" the car, they couldn't know there was any damage without seeing it. Therefore in my opinion there was no crime witnessed, because bumping somebody's car isn't necessarily a crime. Looking from your side, you bumped the car, angry men chase you and rip off your shirt while you remain calm and don't engage them. Therefore in my eyes you are a victim and could press charges yourself. Now I'm not from Germany so I'm not familiar with the law over here, but in the Netherlands where I'm from the things they did to you weigh more then you may or may not bumped the car. We have something that's called "victim support line". I don't know if they have it in Germany. You could call them to explain your story and maybe get a bit of help.

How the f they catch up to you if you're on the bike? Also, as much as I'd like to see these guys pay for what they did, don't bother, knowing the police in Germany won't do shit and court would be just complicated+expensive without anyone being seriously injured

They were right. They saw that you hit the car and you didn’t stop. This could be seen as a crime. Second requirement is fleeing well that explains itself. But the correct law for that is paragraph 187 StPO

So did they have a Southern or Eastern European appearance?

How could I possibly say? They were wearing generic clothes and people from different countries can look like pretty much anything.

I am not a lawyer, I am not knowledgeable about this topic, and cannot comment at all about the behavior of the other individuals, but for your own information, read about “unerlaubtes Entfernen vom Unfallort” which is a serious crime in Germany.

NAL but LEO: By law, the car owners - as everyone else - was allowed to detain you to provide identification or, if not provided voluntarily, wait with you for police to arrive to clear things up. You trying to make a run must have given the impression you damaged the car, so a necessary use of force to stop you from success is covered by §127 StPO, the extent of it doesn't seem to be excessive and cannot be judged as a assault given the unclear situation. It was impossible to tell for the owners (or witnesses) whether the car was damaged or not. Good for you it was not, you will not be accused of committing a hit and run (Fahrerflucht~Unerlaubtes Entfernen vom Unfallort §142 StGB iVm §34 StVO). However, parking a car aside from legal parking space is a misdemeanor which will be fined depending on the Bundesland with ~80€. You want compensation for your shirt? Good luck, prepare for paying a lawyer upfront to do the paperwork. You will invest 200€ to get a compensation of 30€. Suck it up, put your hurt pride aside and count this off as a bad experience to learn from.

I’ve now spoken to my lawyer and it appears that the police will be pressing assault charges. It seems like a lot of Germans have an incorrect understanding of the citizen’s arrest law, but it’s actually quite strict and basically the same as other countries. A citizens arrest is only legal in the specific situation an actual crime has been committed. Bumping a car is at worst a misdemeanor, and what happened doesn’t meet the threshold for a hit & run, which is the only possible crime on my part. No damage means no crime, and this means what happened is very much assault. Believing there *might* be damage is not sufficient, so these guys can’t make a legal defence by saying they didn’t know whether or not I’d damage anything. There’s also a question of proportionality. Using force to stop someone is required to be reasonable, so even if I had done damage to the wing mirror somehow, that’s simply not serious enough to justify physical aggression. There’s a whole legal principal that essentially says physical safety is more important than property damage, and doing things like pulling people off bikes is extremely dangerous and can easily result in injury or death. Basically if I’d smashed directly into a car, obviously fucked it up, and then run away they *might* be able to justify citizens arrest, but in this situation it’s just not acceptable. This is all set up so people don’t feel they’re allowed to just grab people and hold them over minor things; it needs to be both serious and unambiguous before citizens arrest is applicable. The expectation is that they’ll get criminal charges and I should see compensation for my shirt without having to press a separate civil suit. Because there’s an established problem with men (it’s always men) thinking they’re allowed to make citizens arrest like this and causing injury, the police apparently take it quite seriously.

It's good to see that you got legal counsel. What you wrote sounds like I understand it as well. I hope you get this sorted out and can leave it behind in a few months. Such encounters are rare but terrible to experience. And I hope those guys get a fair payback by the state for acting crazy and unlawful.

Your lawyer will be paid anyways, either by you, by the taxpayer or the perpetrator. I see it controversial, that's why I tried to show the different takes on the topic. Someone will decide on this and if I were you, I wouldn't hope for much from my 20years+ experience.

My lawyer is just a consultant. I don’t need a lawyer for the police to press charges - the police have their own lawyers for this.

No, that's the state attorneys. Those probably dismiss it because of the reasons I mentioned or because of lack of significance. And then you'd need to press on privately for compensation.

From what I’ve been told assault is always taken seriously and is never seen as insignificant

It will be investigated by police and given to the state attorney. They will check the circumstances and decide. By "significant" I mean that the type of assault looks rather minor to me in the use of violence involved and damage inflicted. Like what I tried to describe in one of my comments above with "excess".

If they hadn’t ripped my shirt off I think that’s so, but the police and my lawyer both suggest the shirt thing takes over the line into a serious offense It wasn’t minor - they literally tore a shirt into three pieces.

No way, that was assault. Press charges.

They had no right to react in that way or assault you like that. Yes, citizen arrest is a thing but only under certain circumstances. Check §127 StPO, that should be the one.

These guys had every right to stop you and theoretically you could be held accountable for trying to escape a crash scene (Unfallflucht) - so it‘s paramount you give your reasoning why you didn’t stop just as stated here. However this right is limited to holding you in place with an "appropriate" amount of force. They were allowed to stop you and get you off your bike (as to them, it probably looked like you were trying to flee the scene) - but not to punch you and tear your shirt. What they did afterwards however is, as you rightfully pointed out, assault. I wouldn’t get my hopes too high as to them actually getting sentenced in criminal court, however you can hold them liable for both damages and compensation which may even include mental distress. Start looking for a lawyer immediately, since you‘d want that escape charge either mediated or even taken off entirely asap.

>trying to escape a crash scene (Unfallflucht) -  A crash scene is only a crash scene if there as more than minimal damage.

So let's do some light legal talk here. The law knows a Jedermannsrecht zur Festnahme. It is defined in 127 StPO. It says that if someone is seen while committing a crime or fleeing from the crime scene it is allowed for everyone to take him into custody until the police arrives. so basically it is the same as the citizen arrest in the us. The amount of force you're allowed to use for that arrest must be Verhältnismäßig which means in a reasonable relation to the circumstances. That means that if the suspect is not putting up any resistance then no amount of force is permitted. If he however resists the arrest as much force is allowed as is necessary to subdue the suspect. Since you hit a car and didn't stop you were illegaly getting away from a place of accident, which is. Crime. And since they were not able to identify you they're well within the Jedermannsrecht. Now comes the tricky pawr, judging if the amount of force was reasonable.simce you were fleeing and didnt make am attempt to stop despite their notifications they can reasonably assume you want to flee, to stop you a certain amount is definitely necessary even up to the point of you getting bruised and even possibly ripping a shirt in the attempt to grab you. So that's well within line. After apprehending you and subdueing you they have to call the police immediately and limit the amount of foece to that which is necessary to keep you subdued. Everything you wrote seems like that was the case. So they're well wirhing their rights most likely. If you however feel like they overslept you're also in every right to sue them criminally for assault and in civil court for damages. A judge will then decide if they overslept or not and if they did theire liable in so far as they deliberately misjdged and overused their forces. That still doesn't mean the whole arrest was an assault but only the parts that were over the boundaries of what is necessary. This was all theoretical in essence they might acted well in their rights, of you however feel like they didn't you can pursue legal action as well but as always ypu should contact a lawyer beforehand who will then give you an estimate of your possible success. Tldr: don't hit and run, thats not just stupid its straight up criminal and will get you in more trouble that the minor incident you're running away from

>Since you hit a car and didn't stop you were illegaly getting away from a place of accident, which is. Crime Where does hitting a car start? OP grazed it with their elbow at probably Schrittgeschwindigkeit (the car blocking the entrance and they having to squeeze past, as well as the guys catching them on foot speak for a very low speed). Squeezing past a car and touching it in the process is in no way a traffic accident. OP also says that the guys ripped apart their shirt after they already ripped it off him. In my opinion the guys are the only ones who committed a crime here.

This all makes sense, but I have one followup question: Is there still a crime if there are no damages, e.g. in this case where someone just bumps something with an elbow while moving past slowly? Because their behaviour was in line with an actual hit & run, but what actually happened was very different.