Fantasies of Violence. German citizens expressing their concepts of violence and ideas about democracy in letters referring to the case of the serial killer Jürgen Bartsch (1966-1971)
Serial killers fascinate people. The fascination becomes visible in different forms, one of those is the focus of this article. After his arrest in 1966 Jürgen Bartsch (1946-1976) confessed the murder of four boys. Local and national media reported extensively about the case. Bartsch’s first sentence, passed in 1967, was revised by the Federal Court in 1969. Two years later the final sentence was found. During these years about 250 German citizens sent letters to the responsible institutions. They did not only express opinions and anger but also their proper concepts of violence and ideas about democracy. Moreover, the letters show ways of communication in a media society. The 1960s were the time of significant changes in West German society; the letters highlight currents of persisting stereotypes about the criminals as the ‘others’: Almost regardless of the discussions and explanations in the courtroom, which represent the changing scientific attitudes towards sexual offenders in the 1960s and 1970s, there persisted retaliatory logic and anti-democratic positions within public opinion.
https://static.openedition.org/journals/images/favicon.png
Letters from persons not involved (1966-1971)

Letter writers

Addressees

12From 1966 to 1968, the letters were mostly sent to the authorities involved in the investigation, which means the police in Düsseldorf, Essen and Langenberg and the prosecuting attorney’s office. Because the investigation was completed before the first proceedings, almost no letters were addressed to these authorities in the time period from 1969 to 1971. This time people mostly wrote to the court and to the judge of the second trial. In many cases writers sent their letters to an official addressee, for example a judge or the prosecuting attorney. Letter writers knew the names from media reports, which also published photos of the judges and attorneys. Focusing on one person instead of an institution in some letters even culminated in a death threat:

45 NRW HStA, Nr. 215: Eine Gesellschaft für Ordnung und Anständigkeit, «An den Landgerichtsrat K. Fisc (...)

In the proceedings we expect clear decisions, if not, you will have an axe on your head, you dirty bastard! We mean it, we wait for what will come, none of us is too cowardly to act, mark our words, you dirty slob. Playing on other boys’ butt and then giving your dirty hand to somebody else, ugh! [...] Well yes, we are calmly looking forward to the case. Be responsible for what you can but do it right. Do you understand?! If Bartsch gets off free, you will go !!

13The judge is addressed with the German familiar «Du»-form, which is unusual for somebody who is not a personal acquaintance and therefore indicates that the author did not hold the judge in high esteem. In this letter, as well as in a few others, the characteristics of the homosexual and pedophile Bartsch were projected onto the judge. This also happened to others active in the proceedings; especially experts in sexology were accused of being homosexual, pedophile or interested in pornography. This slip may point to the writer’s own experiences, fears or desires. The writer was obviously not conscious of the contradictions in his writing: In contrast to the sentence «Well yes, we are calmly looking forward to the case» the exclamation marks in the text betray the underlying emotion that was anything but calm. The threat (and defence mechanisms) become even more obvious in confrontation of the single «you» (meaning the stranger, the enemy) with the «we» (the self), which suggests that there is a number of people supporting the threat against a single judge. Although the beginning of the letter is clearly written from the perspective of a single man or woman, it is signed by «a society for order and decency» suggesting that there is an organization behind it.

47 NRW HStA, Nr. 215: Busch, Karl, «Sehr geehrter Herr Landgerichtsdirektor Fischer!», Berlin, 7.4.197 (...)

Nevertheless you are – according to my observations in the community – the most hated man in society nowadays. The mildest comment of a citizen I asked: ‘Bartsch should go to the guillotine and the judge, the experts and the lawyer as well... !’

51 Polizeischutz für die Familie des Bartsch-Verteidigers. Drohbriefe und anonyme Anrufe: Sie sollten (...)

‘You should be ashamed helping such a bestial murderer. You deserve to hang on the gallows.’ Such threatening letters and anonymous phone calls are directed against the lawyer who is defending the child-murderer in four cases. When the respectable lawyer of Wuppertal, Heinz Möller (48), took over the defence of the murderer Bartsch strong protest was heard. Not only was the lawyer the target of threats also his family was affected. The lawyer has three little sons. Heinz Möller is afraid for their life since the trial has begun. After the threat of assassination of Jürgen Bartsch in the courtroom a police car was put at Möller’s disposal. The police is guarding the lawyer’s family home, situated on the outskirts of Wupppertal, day and night .

More interest in revenge than in understanding and the production of knowledge

a. Letters referring to the punishment

19Although some arguments can be traced back to specific circumstances of the time, letters of both periods unveiled ongoing fantasies of violence and a retaliatory logic.

Letters in favour of the death penalty

22Unpublished letters asking for death penalty tended not to argue but to assert without reasoning. When trying to present an argument they usually referred to the expenses for a second trial or for Bartsch’s accomodation payed for by the tax payers. Another concern was the safety of children, as Berta Z. mentioned.

References to the Nazi past

24Writers of both published and unpublished letters compared the case of Jürgen Bartsch to that of the convicted National Socialist Rudolf Hess. In 1969 Leopold H. wrote to the Federal Court in Karlsruhe:

71 NRW HStA, Nr. 215: Hacke, Leopold, «An den Dritten Strafsenat des Bundesgerichtshofes», Berlin, 22. (...)

It is unbelievable, you develop such an incomprehensible enthusiasm to take care of a heinous criminal. – Why couldn’t the highest German judicial authorities bring about the release of the so-called war criminal Rudolf Hess? This would require some courage though !

More fantasies of violent punishments

In favour of less violent punishment

Understanding of democracy

31A positive evaluation of the National Socialists’ regime certainly was an anti-democratic statement. Nor could being in favour of torturing the child murderer be brought in line with a democratic and law-abiding attitude. Moreover, requests for a quick trial also pointed in this direction. To oppose this tendency the Federal Court clearly stated in 1969 that everything had to be done to come as clear to the truth as possible.

b. Some explanations for Bartsch’s cruel murders

36Those letters referring to the punishment mostly revealed personal revenge fantasies. Another set of letters, which referred to explanations for Bartsch’s cruel murders also involved fantasies but they can be traced back to information reported in the media. Letter writers sometimes referred to these reports by explicitly mentioning the articles they had read. In the first time period (1966 to 1968) the media mostly reported about the offender solely to be blamed for the murders and about scapegoats to be held responsible for the fact that Bartsch was only arrested after his fourth murder. From 1969 to 1971, the negative influence of Bartsch’s upbringing was the main focus. The contents of the letters followed this simplified scheme. In contrast to the unchanging desires for punishment the appreciation of the difficulties of the Bartsch case grew from the first to the second trial.

Go(o)d vs. evil

A butcher by trade

40Some months later – in 1967 – Bild-Zeitung turned to the genetic relatives of Bartsch and evoked many readers’ responses. Bild-Zeitung reported about Bartsch’s natural mother who was severely ill during her pregnancy and died some months after her son’s birth. The article, called «How the parents of Bartsch lived – dogs chase for the critically ill mother», reported the memories of a former neighbour: Because no medicine was available the mother’s boyfriend tried to help with a household remedy, dog fat, that the neighbors had suggested to him. According to Bild the neighbor recalled: «’Every night Adolf looked for dogs. It was not easy, because the animals were supposed to be fat. Sometimes he traded half a pound of butter for a dog.’» The article further reports:

108 Borchert, U./H. Koch und I. Gallmeister, …“So lebten die Bartsch-Eltern”: Hundejagd für die todkran (...)

P[...] killed the dogs in the room in front of the pregnant woman. He skinned the animals and hung them on two nails on the door facing Lisbeth’s [the mothers, KB] bed. It must have been a ghastly scene. The neighbor exactly remembers: ‘In the attic hung a blue light bulb which spread cold light on the furniture. Lisbeth sat upright on her bed and stared at Adolf with wide open eyes ’.

The adoptive parents

Educational institutions

117 Mauz, Gerhard, «Wohin mit ihm? Spiegel-Reporter Gerhard Mauz im Prozeß gegen Jürgen Bartsch», in: D (...)

Homes do not have enough staff, there is the typical terror between the children, the regiment of older against younger. There is an educator, who took Jürgen Bartsch to bed with him, although ‘nothing happened’. Besides there is the homoerotic phase, fixed and not outgrown .

Catholic church: guilty or not guilty?

Is it really so difficult? – Personal experiences

46One reader pointed to family circumstances rather than society in general in a published letter to the political magazine Spiegel in 1971. He asked if the case of Jürgen Bartsch was really so abnormal and difficult when viewed form a psychoanalytical perspective:

123 S., Friedrich (Heidelberg), «Ganz normal (Leserbriefe)», in: Der Spiegel (12.4.1971), pp. 16-19.

I am able to recall very clearly that when I was the same age, starting at the age of 15, these hideous sadistic fantasies started which I thought of every night in my imagination and then printed on paper. Who knows whether these fantasies would have remained imaginary if I had not had a safe and sound family full of love. Going through puberty these fantasies totally stopped, and now I am not a habitual criminal but a respected middle-class academic through and through. [...] I am convinced that the criminal acts of Bartsch are the result of a coinciding of many unfortunate circumstances which allowed him to act on his sadistic urges which are more or less a side effect of the sexual development of any human being (or any male human being), but which can be overcome with care and security and which will go away all on its own .

47Compared to the defence mechanisms in many unpublished letters, this reader recalls his own experience with astonishing frankness – although his last name is not given as is the rule in this magazine. The letter also gives a summary of some reasoning: It refers to sexual development in general and makes the assumption that Bartsch was a product of unfortunate circumstances.

Possible Repercussions of the letters

51The patterns of explanation, wishes for punishment and unconsious fears and desires already show a complex interaction of various factors, which also had intentional or unintentional consequences for the Bartsch case. While no simple causal connection can be assumed, it is still possible to present a diffuse picture of repercussions, for example on the trials.

The proceedings

57A look at the prosecuting attorney of the second trial shows that he, too, might not have been totally unaffected by the popularity of the Bartsch case. He wanted Bartsch to be convicted as an adult and asked for a life sentence although the Federal Court had already stated in 1969 that this was an inappropriate demand.

58According to Judge Fischer, based on the evidence only one sentence was possible in 1971. Therefore, he criticized both the defence lawyer and the prosecuting attorney: He found the evidence of the main hearing convincing that it was unreasonable to ask for a courageous sentence (as the defence lawyer did) or for a life sentence as the prosecuting attorney suggested. Judge Fischer also addressed «the public«:

139 NRW HStA, Nr. 229: Fischer, «Urteilsspruch 6.4.1971: Mündliche Begründung», Düsseldorf, 6.4.1971, p (...)

Everybody – who calls for the death penalty, which does not exist anymore and will not exist in the future, or for a lifetime prison sentence that would be against the law, because it would disregard the evidence – misjudges the foundation of our criminal law, which is exclusively based on the guilt of the offender, on his degree of responsibility and, in the case of adolescents, also on the degree of development of responsibility and maturity and which is not based on considerations of expediency or even on the desire for revenge of outraged and unreasonable contemporaries .

Conclusions

60Writing letters shows one form of appropriation of the phenomenon of «serial killings». The content of the letters reveals that almost regardless of the explanations of the experts, that had been discussed in the courtroom, there existed retaliatory logic and anti-democratic opinions.

63Nevertheless, the letters had a specific power: Death treats to the judges and defence lawyers had a psychological impact on these persons as can be seen in the course of the proceedings. The psychological power of the letters was reinforced by similar statements of face-to-face-publics which became visible in large groups of people before the buildings of public institutions, e.g. police stations, or in the courtroom.