Trial investigates allegations of fabricated reports and police violence

The main defendant now faces charges including acts of torture, while the four others stand accused of failing to assist a person in danger, forgery, and obstructing justice.

The presiding judge opened the hearing with stern words for the main defendant, stating that he had caused "immense damage", adding that "if we can no longer believe what you write in your official reports, then we might as well pack up and go home". He continued that this case inevitably raises questions among the public.

The events date back to 2019, when the main defendant and two younger colleagues were called to a bar in Esch-sur-Alzette because of a fight. By the time they arrived, the situation had calmed down. The victim, who was accused of throwing a chair at another customer, was heavily intoxicated. Before being taken to a sobering-up cell, a doctor had to issue a certificate confirming the man was fit for detention. A second patrol later arrived with a van to take him to the Esch Emile Mayrisch Hospital Centre (CHEM). But even before he could climb in, an argument broke out. Eventually, the man ended up lying on the floor of the van between the seats.

When they arrived at the hospital, one of the officers went to fetch a wheelchair. The man was placed into it, which caused him pain because his hands were cuffed behind his back. He tried to stand up, but the officers forced him back down. Before reaching the doctor, the lead officer punched the man in the stomach.

After the medical check, they returned, this time without the wheelchair, and two officers held the man by his arms as they led him back towards the van. Just before reaching it, they turned him around so that he was facing the main defendant, who struck him in the face with force, wearing reinforced gloves. The blow knocked the man to the ground. The officers then lifted him into the van, laughed together, and drove back to the police station.

There is no doubt about these events, as surveillance cameras at the CHEM recorded everything, and excerpts were shown in court on Tuesday.

Back at the station, the officers took the man to a cell and cleaned the van corridor, as there was blood everywhere. The man's eye was completely swollen shut, something confirmed by investigators from the General Police Inspectorate (IGP), who said that surveillance footage from the police station also showed his injuries. The officers then failed to check on him every two hours, as required.

After six hours without supervision, the morning shift found the man lying in a pool of his own blood and called an ambulance. One officer also noticed that the doctor's certificate from earlier that night made no mention of facial injuries, even though the man now looked, as the officer put it, "as if he had been hit by a train".

The accused officer quickly realised how serious the situation was and began contacting his colleagues, all of whom were younger than him, and pressured them to back up his version of events. He fabricated a false story, claiming that the victim had already been injured in the bar when he allegedly hit his head on a table, or later in the van against the partition.

One of the female colleagues helped him collect false witness statements to support this version. Together, they all signed a falsified report sent to the public prosecutor, in which they claimed that the man had spat at them and tried to bite them, all of which was invented.

The presiding judge emphasised that the man could easily have died, for example by choking on his own blood. When the judge asked why he had hit the man so violently, the main defendant replied: "A colleague raised her voice, and when that happens, I lose control."

When asked why they hadn't taken the man straight back to the doctor after the beating, three of the four officers said they had not looked him in the face again afterwards.

As for why they had signed the falsified report, they explained that they had not dared to go against their senior colleague, fearing to be labelled a "traitor", a "black sheep who stabs colleagues in the back".

When the judge asked why they thought they could get away with it, none of them could give a clear answer.

The trial continues on Wednesday afternoon.

Read also: Trial opens over 2019 police violence case against Syrian asylum seeker