View Full Version : Monica refused to participate in trial?

Apr 14th, 2003, 10:31 PM
I'm not a Seles fan, so forgive me for not knowing this. In another thread, a poster who shall remain nameless (Fortis), siad that Monica had refused to participate in Gunter Parche's trial when the German authorities asked her to.

First, is that true?

Second, if true, has Monica ever given a rationale for that decision?

Mind you, she was stabbed in front of a stadium full of people. Her participation shouldn't have been necessary. But I also know German courts are more lenient than American courts with where 'insanity' is concerned. (In the US, its legal to give drugs to a schizophrenic to make him sane enough to execute.) Did i know that at 19? Actually, yes, but my father was a history teacher, and I was a very political kid (Member of NOW, devotee of protest marches, able to expound ad nauseum on a score of useless topics). Monica had a very different life. Rather like Jenn having no idea what Title IX was, I doubt the systemic biases of the German court system were Monica's idea of light reading.


It's an interesting decision if that's what she did.

So what's the real deal?

Apr 14th, 2003, 10:39 PM
It's true. She refused at some level to cooperate with the German prosecutors, who wanted her to appear in person.

HOWEVER-from reading her book (From Fear to Victory) it's understandable why she refused to go to Germany.

1. It was obvious Gunter stabbed her. Hello-all the world saw it.

2. Worst of all, according to Monica, German law at the time required her to sit WITH HER BACK to Gunter, meaning she couldn't accuse him face to face. Can't say that i blame her at all considering where she was stabbed.

Question for German posters-is this part of German trials today? Is it
peculiar to only some staten?

Apr 14th, 2003, 11:25 PM
Stop the silliness. Seles would have been given super-protection in court.

She didn't take part in the trial because she also had lucrative civil lawsuits against the organisers in Hamburg and the WTA.

As I said she can't accuse the Germans of not meteing out justice if she refused to answer the call to participate. You can't have your cake and eat it. A book written by Seles or with Seles' input would only have her side of the story. The objective point of view is that she was invited to take part and refused. I wonder why she holds a grudge against the German system?? Because it brings her more attention..hmmm.

Tennis Fool
Apr 14th, 2003, 11:27 PM
Fortis, are you German? Just wondering...

Apr 14th, 2003, 11:36 PM
Fortis, you are such an idiot. If Monica is an attention seeker like you claim, then we would have heard something about her during the 2.5 year absence. She was nowhere to be seen and nobody could know anything about her. Wow she's such an attention seeker. :rolleyes: Every post you write puts Monica down, listening to you you'd probably stab her yourself, get a fucking life.

Apr 14th, 2003, 11:46 PM
It's obvious the emotional scars were too much to handle...It's often that in murder, attempted murder, attempted rape, rape, etc. cases that the victims can't relive the experience because it's too hard.

Apr 14th, 2003, 11:54 PM
NO, Serlesrules..or whatever your name is ....Youy clearly think seles is a saint and can do no wrong. I merely am being objective by pointing out that she was invited to take part in the trial and did not.

Parche was insane.. what's your rationale for spending countless hours on a board extolling the so-called virtues of someone you don't know closely ..Let's see ..delusion...obsession...irrationality...sounds close to insanity to me.

Tennis Fool
Apr 14th, 2003, 11:57 PM
Hey everybody Selesrules and Fortis are fighting! (Carry on, this should be good;) )

Apr 15th, 2003, 12:54 AM
Great sig TennisFool.

I'm not here to fight :angel:
hate Germans or defend/hate on Monica.

I'm curious about her statement about a witness having his/her back to the accused though-it sounds bizarre.

Can anyone tell us if this is German law?

Apr 15th, 2003, 01:15 AM
Fortis - I think you're not being entirely reasonable. The man was crazy. Unless German law allowed them to chain him to his seat during the trial, there's no reason to believe he would NOT attack Monica in court. he attacked her in front of a stadium full of people. Any reasonable person HAS to assume he might try it in a court room. If getting caught scared him, he wouldn't have done it in the first place.

You say 'Seles would have been given super-protection in court.' Sez who? I can get out of a chair, over a four foot wall and across 20 feet in 3 seconds. And I'm fat and middle-aged. Unless you can say for certain the man was chained in place, that arguement is, pardon me, bullshit.

And testifying at the trial would have in no way impacted her civil lawsuits. If anything, she WEAKENED her case in lawsuits by not testifying. Use some common sense.

As for 'she can't accuse the Germans of not meteing out justice if she refused to answer the call to participate., how many witnesses did they have? Five THOUSAND. Ten Thousand. A stadium full of people saw him stab her and he walked. And you claim the victim of that attack has no right to accuse the court of not meteing out justice?

You just undermined your entire arguement, with which I agreed with a good deal of, by saying something patently ridiculous.

Apr 15th, 2003, 01:20 AM
great post!

Apr 17th, 2003, 12:53 PM
protection Fortis?! What protection?! The same one they provided to Monica while on the tenniscourt?! That protection sure didn't help!

Besided EVERYONE saw that it was Gunther Parche......what else is there to say?! Monica didn't even see the guy coming, so I wonder what she would have to declare?!

Apr 17th, 2003, 01:27 PM
Can anyone answer my question about German trial procedure from the earlier post?

Apr 17th, 2003, 01:36 PM
Just to clarify - Parche didn't "walk free" because he was declared innocent, he was declared to be clinically insane and therefore not accountable for his actions. He went to hospital in the end, I think, for a significant period of time.

Apr 17th, 2003, 01:48 PM
I believe I remember 2 years saki...

Apr 17th, 2003, 01:51 PM
Just to clarify - Parche didn't "walk free" because he was declared innocent, he was declared to be clinically insane and therefore not accountable for his actions. He went to hospital in the end, I think, for a significant period of time.

He was declared mentally diminished, but was not required to seek psychiatric help. That was one of the results of the trial that was so absurd.

The two-year period rtael is thinking of was simply the time of his probation.

Apr 17th, 2003, 01:55 PM
Spirit, yes, sorry, that's right. But the probation did entail a certain amount of supervision - wasn't allowed to leave the country etc etc.

The point being that he wasn't found to be innocent but mentally diminished. And Seles being present at the trial wouldn't have made it go any other way.

Personally, I think that the German court showed a considerable amount of courage in not severely punishing someone who was mentally ill given the amount of publicity and pressure surrounding the trial.

Apr 17th, 2003, 02:04 PM
Didn't she ask to be allowed to give her testimony by video (which was refused)?

A stadium full of people, video tape of the attack (or most of it) - what could her testimony have added? Esp. since her back was to him and she didn't actually see him stab her (thank God for small favors)? Did the court need her to verify that being stabbed really is a bad thing? How would her being there have made a difference?

Apr 17th, 2003, 02:07 PM
to clarify, the wound itself wasnt very fatal BUT it was a couple millimetres (or a few hair strands away) from being life endangering

you cant blame monica

Apr 17th, 2003, 02:20 PM
Personally, I think that the German court showed a considerable amount of courage in not severely punishing someone who was mentally ill given the amount of publicity and pressure surrounding the trial.

I partially agree with you, but there are four points about the trial which disturb me.

1. The sentence contained an absurd contradiction: Parche was too insane to be held accountable for his actions, yet was not considered insane enough to be required to seek counseling! I've never heard of any verdict before or since in which the judge tried to have it both ways.

2. Another reason he was given such a light sentence was that the judge believed he'd never do it again. As far as I'm concerned, this sends a clear message to would-be criminals that it's okay to perform a violent crime once, but not twice! By this logic, I could kill my wife or my boss and then tell the judge, "I'm sorry, your honor, but I'll never find myself in a situation like that again, so it will never happen again," and that would apparently be acceptable. Clearly it isn't acceptable, therefore this philosophy leads to an illogical conclusion.

3. I believe that the punishment of a criminal can help the victim heal, and I feel that that aspect of a society dealing with criminals must be taken into account and given more weight. When a criminal is not punished for a crime, that sends a message to the victim of the crime that society doesn't think he or she is worth very much. In Monica's autobiography, she felt like the German legal system, in letting her attacker go free, treated her like something far less than a human being. I would have felt the same. Her need to heal and to see justice should have carried far more weight.

Also, being mentally diminished is a lot like being a child, IMO, and children are punished when they do wrong so they will learn that what they did is wrong. I don't see why they couldn't have done the same here.

4. In general, the judge (and the appeal judge, who was a different person) seemed to feel far too much sympathy for Parche, almost to the point where Parche was being made into the victim rather than Monica, and I simply find that disgusting.

I'm all for rehabilitation and being civilised, but there has to be a balance, and that trial was nowhere near it.

Just FYI for everyone, another reason he was allowed to go free was that he'd already been in jail for half a year, simply to hold him until his trial was finished. Apparently, this jail time, although officially not serving as punishment, was taken into account by the judge. I'm not sure what to think about that one; Parche himself expected 15 years in prison for his crime (he attacked Monica knowing he'd be caught and sent to prison). Six months? Hmmm.

Apr 17th, 2003, 02:26 PM
Would definitely agree with you, Spirit, on your first two points.

On the second two... I really don't agree that criminals should be punished in order to help the victim heal, nor would I agree that Parche wasn't a "victim" in some sense. My mother is severely mentally ill so I've had a certain amount of experience visiting her and all, and I definitely feel that mentally ill people even those who commit crimes are vicitims.

But anyway...

Apr 17th, 2003, 02:44 PM
I agree that criminals are also victims. I, too, have had some experience with that. No one just casually wakes up in the morning and just consciously decides, "Hey, I think I'll be a menace to society today." People are the way they are for reasons.

But I still think that particular trial was out of balance, and I still believe that punishment can help a victim heal. If every criminal was treated like Parche, laws would be a joke because there would be no threat of punishment to back them up. Without consequences for breaking them, laws are pretty darn meaningless.