The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg ruled in the dispute between Till Lindemann and Der Spiegel regarding allegations of sexual contact during Rammstein concerts. The OLG differentiates between knockout drops and alcohol. The legal dispute continues.

With her head slightly lowered, Simone Käfer looks through the upper part of her glasses at the trial representatives of Der Spiegel and Till Lindemann almost sympathetically. The look on the face of the presiding judge of the Press Senate of the Higher Regional Court (OLG) in Hamburg, the serene and self-assured tone of voice give it away: A lawyer's plea is no longer really worthwhile here.

Shortly before, Käfer had made it clear that the court, like the Hamburg Regional Court (LG) before it in the preliminary injunction proceedings, intends to rule against Der Spiegel on the main point. The regional court had prohibited the news magazine from making the allegation that Rammstein singer Till Lindemann had sedated women or had them sedated with the help of knock-out drops or drugs in order to enable him to perform sexual acts on the women.

Spiegel lawyer Dr. Marc-Oliver Srocke (Advant Beiten) begins the oral proceedings on July 10 despite the clear announcements of the lawyer's speech for the gallery. His brief introduction alone, "All right", reveals that he himself is well aware of the futility of his efforts. He argues that the Spiegel reports from June 2023 "Sex, Power, Alcohol - What the young women from 'Row Zero' report" and "Götterdämmerung" do not even raise the suspicion that Rammstein singer Till Lindemann made women sexually submissive with knockout drops. This alleged impression was "like a patchwork quilt made up of various statements". "Where does it say that?" Srocke asks the members of the Senate.

Instead, the report only described Till Lindemann's "casting system" around Rammstein concerts - an "ice-cold recruitment system" with various stages. At Rammstein concerts, women were put in situations in which they were no longer able to formulate a clear "no" due to a variety of circumstances, or that it was difficult for them to do so. Their cell phones had been taken away from them, alcohol had been forced on them and this had created corresponding pressure. All of these were undisputed allegations. Accusations that are so serious that they alone justify the questions in the article, such as why the band could simply carry on after the accusations. Such a question does not indicate that the accusations actually refer to the secret distribution of knockout drops. "MeToo doesn't need a suspicion of knockout drops," says Srocke.

Senate Chairwoman Käfer has her counter-argument ready. Quotes published in the article from concertgoer Shelby Lynn ("I got spiked at Rammstein" and "Till gave everybody a tequila shot"), among others, suggested that Lindemann might have had something to do with knockout drops. This was not just an expression of opinion, but provided factual evidence to suggest that an event had actually taken place. Srocke's response that the Hamburg Regional Court had classified precisely this statement by Shelby Lynn as an admissible expression of opinion in the form of an inference fell flat in the large courtroom 210.

Srocke's opponent, Lindemann's lawyer Simon Bergmann (Schertz Bergmann), is clear that he will take home a victory on the central point. Because the accusation of suspected use of knockout drops is by far the most serious for Till Lindemann, and it is crucial that it is prohibited. Bergmann can content himself with stating that it is of course permissible to criticize sex between a 60-year-old and a 20-year-old. "But the accusation of giving knockout drops goes too far," says Bergmann.

As expected, this was also the view of the Higher Regional Court in the ruling handed down on July 19, 2024 (case no. 7 U 37/23). Spiegel's main argument, according to which the suspicion was not aroused at all, was dealt with there with the mere statement that "the reporting referred to" provided such indications. The court does not say from which of the 22 passages mentioned in the application for an injunction it derives the suspicion of the use of knockout drops. It also remains unclear for Der Spiegel which passages it would have to delete in order to get out of the prohibition tenor.

However, the OLG's reasoning is more profound when it comes to the lack of a minimum amount of evidence. This is a prerequisite for admissible suspicion reporting. According to the OLG, there was no credible evidence for the administration of knockout drops. If the women reported memory gaps in connection with the after-show parties, this was not sufficient to assume that the women in question had been administered drugs or knockout drops. The article would also have had to describe the symptoms to be expected with knockout drops, and these would have had to be compared with the symptoms described by the women. Apart from the fact that there was already no viable evidence for the use of knockout drops at all, there was certainly no evidence that Lindemann himself was behind it.

One of his poems, which is quoted in the Spiegel article, does not support this either. Lindemann had written the lyrics here:

"I like to sleep with you when you sleep, /

when you don't move at all. / ...

that's how it should be, that's how it's fun /

a little Rohypnol in the wine."

"From the publication of such a text, which is deliberately aimed at provoking the public, it cannot and must not naturally be concluded that its author actually practices the behavior presented to the readers of the poem as recognizably fictitious," said the OLG in its reasoning.

However, Simon Bergmann's success for Till Lindemann is not entirely unclouded. Before the regional court, Bergmann had been able to ensure that Der Spiegel was also prohibited from stating that Lindemann had used alcohol to make women sexually submissive. Bergmann asked why the Higher Regional Court had now lifted this ban after a clear indication during the hearing. "If vodka was indeed drunk to excess and served, we find it difficult to prohibit this," Käfer replies.

So Bergmann tries again - with a reference to criminal law. It's not about alcohol per se, but the suspicion that women should be made sexually available with it, which raises the suspicion of sexual assault under Section 177 (2) No. 2 of the German Criminal Code (StGB). Käfer replied succinctly: In contrast to the distribution of knockout drops, it was a fact that there were many drunk women at the after-show parties. A point that was to be explained in more detail in the later grounds for the verdict.

With regard to the alcohol served, the Higher Regional Court later stated in the judgment that no suspicion had been aroused that it was administered with the aim of enabling Lindemann to engage in sexual acts with the women in the first place. The fact that high-proof alcohol is consumed at after-show parties rather corresponds to the expectations of the readers and is therefore not suitable in itself to give rise to suspicion of the kind described.

In other words: Because it is normal that a lot is drunk at parties of rock stars, the reader - probably in contrast to knockout drops - does not get the idea that the alcohol is deliberately used for sex purposes.

In addition to this main aspect, the regional court will also decide on two other issues. Firstly, whether Der Spiegel is allowed to write that employees spoke of "slut parades" and "leftover fucking" at after-show parties. Here, the OLG comes to the conclusion that Lindemann and other band members are not affected in their claim to honor by such statements by employees and lifts the preliminary injunction of the regional court on this point.

A claim for injunctive relief on the grounds of untruthfulness could only be considered if such statements were incompatible with Lindemann's other conduct, for which he stands in public. In view of the undisputed casting system, in which selected women are taken to the "after-after-show party", where sexual contact with band members takes place, while the other women remain at the normal after-show party and are "hit on" there, comments such as "slut parade" and "leftover fucking" are no longer damaging to Lindemann and Co.'s reputation. The OLG stated that the "words merely attacked here do not harbor any further potential for significant damage to the band members' reputations". This means that for people who behave like the Rammstein band members, such comments can no longer cause any additional damage. To exaggerate: the reputation is already ruined anyway - depending on your point of view - or intact by rock star standards.

The OLG left the ban in place with the Spiegel statement that Till Lindemann and band member Richard Kruspe had fought over a woman. This was a factual assertion that had not been made credible by Der Spiegel. The statements in affidavits were limited to conjecture. It was also of no use to Der Spiegel that it had submitted a modified declaration to cease and desist, as this had not been accepted by lawyer Bergmann and should not have been accepted.

At the hearing, lawyer Srocke, accompanied by Spiegel legal counsel Sascha Sajuntz, explained that they wanted the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) to deal with the issues raised and were therefore not prepared to settle.

However, there is still a long way to go before the BGH. The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg is the last instance in the injunction proceedings - as a judicial summary procedure. However, the main action is already underway. It is now the turn of the Hamburg Regional Court and the Hamburg Higher Regional Court to clarify and present the legal issues raised in more detail in their main rulings.

Only then can the BGH be called upon by way of an appeal on points of law or a complaint against denial of leave to appeal. The Lindemann case will therefore keep the courts busy for some time to come.

The next hearing is scheduled for the end of August. This concerns accusations against Lindemann in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, which the Frankfurt Regional Court deemed admissible. Bergmann then appealed to the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court on behalf of his client Lindemann.