Heilbronn Sexual Abuse Trial: Medical Expert Unable to Confirm Penetration

A 47-year-old man in Heilbronn is facing trial for the alleged sexual abuse of his daughter between 2021 and 2022. According to gynecological expert Professor Katharina Rall, medical examinations often cannot definitively prove or exclude penetration, as 90% to 95% of victims may present normal findings.

Why can’t medical exams always prove sexual abuse?

Professor Katharina Rall of Tübingen testified that penetration is often neither provable nor excludable in these cases. She stated that 90% to 95% of girls exhibit what is termed a “normal finding” from a gynecological perspective following sexual abuse.

Rall attributed this to the significant healing capacity of the hymen. According to the expert, injuries in this area typically heal within five to seven days, meaning medical evidence alone cannot rule out abuse.

Did You Know? Injuries to the hymen typically heal within five to seven days, which is why Professor Katharina Rall testified that sexual abuse can never be fully excluded based on a gynecological exam.

What are the specific allegations in the Heilbronn trial?

Prosecutor Michael Koch alleges that the defendant, a German citizen with Russian roots, forced his daughter into oral sex and committed intercourse. These acts allegedly occurred between the summer of 2021 and August 2022, while the victim was 12 and 13 years old.

The victim, now 17, testified in a public session to ensure the public knows what happened. Her lawyer, Tanja Haberzettl-Prach, stated that the allegations also include physical abuse, including being beaten with a belt.

Expert Insight: Samantha Carter notes that when medical evidence is inconclusive, the legal focus shifts entirely to the credibility and consistency of witness testimony. In this case, the lack of physical markers makes the upcoming psychological evaluation of the victim’s statements the primary determinant for the verdict.

How is the defendant responding to the charges?

The defendant denies all accusations and has accused his daughter of lying. During the second day of the trial, he stated he would not even think of such a “terrible sin.”

The man further claimed his daughter has always been a child who was difficult to raise. He testified that she has done so many bad things that he cannot think of anything good to say about her.

What happens next in the legal process?

The court is expected to present a report evaluating the credibility and consistency of the victim’s statements in the coming trial days. This assessment may be more decisive than the gynecological findings.

The case was previously heard in July 2025 at the Amtsgericht, where the Juvenile Protection Court issued a four-year prison sentence. Both the defendant and the prosecution appealed that decision.

Judge Alexander Lobmüller stated that the second Great Youth Chamber of the Landgericht is now reviewing the case from the beginning. A higher prison sentence could be possible if the court determines the defendant is guilty of rape.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the gynecological expert conclude about the evidence?
Professor Katharina Rall concluded that penetration could neither be proven nor excluded, as 90% to 95% of girls show normal findings after abuse due to rapid healing.

What was the outcome of the first trial?
In July 2025, the Amtsgericht sentenced the defendant to four years in prison, a ruling that was later appealed by both the prosecution and the defendant.

Why is the current trial potentially different from the first?
The Landgericht is examining the case to determine if the defendant is guilty of rape, which could lead to a higher prison sentence than the initial four-year term.

How should courts balance inconclusive medical evidence against the consistency of victim testimony in abuse cases?