Dog Crate Case in the Waldviertel: New Report Implicates Social Worker

In the case of a now 15-year-old who was allegedly locked in a dog crate and tortured by his mother in the Waldviertel, a medical report is available. The expertise obtained in the civil lawsuit for pain and suffering compensation for the boy deals with the child's health condition and states that the leading social worker should have organized "acute medical help" after the second home visit. Another expert report is now being obtained.

Lawsuit Against the State of Lower Austria

The civil lawsuit against the state of Lower Austria was filed by victim's lawyer Timo Ruisinger in November of the previous year at the Regional Court of Krems. The total amount in dispute is 180,000 euros, with 150,000 euros for pain and suffering and 30,000 euros for declaratory interest for future damages. Legally, the lawsuit is based on the Lower Austria Child and Youth Welfare Act. The state, which denies the allegations, is thus the provider of child and youth welfare.

The core of the lawsuit is the actions of two employees of the district administration of Waidhofen a. d. Thaya, who were involved in the case. They are a 37-year-old and a 25-year-old. Their actions and omissions are attributed to the state as the provider of child and youth welfare, argue the victim representatives Ruisinger and Heinrich Nagl. The social worker duo did not react adequately. Criminal investigations against the social workers for abuse of office were discontinued in the spring.

Two Home Visits – No Protective Measures Initiated

Accompanied by two danger reports - written by the school and a state hospital - there were unannounced home visits by child and youth welfare to the mother and son on October 28 and November 18, 2022 (four days before the boy fell into a coma). At the first appointment, both social workers were on site. At the second home visit following the hospital's danger report, the leading employee of the district administration of Waidhofen a. d. Thaya appeared alone. Although abnormalities were noted by him, no reason for a so-called imminent danger measure was seen.

In the expert report available to the APA, Hans Salzer, a specialist in pediatrics and adolescent medicine, refers to the employees of child and youth welfare. "The mother's explanations for the wounds, emaciation, and behavioral disorders were accepted and not further investigated. The critical health condition of the child was not recognized," it states. The organization of a helper conference - an exchange of all involved institutions - "at the latest after the first home visit would very likely have uncovered the abuse." And further: "At the latest after the second home visit, acute medical help" for the boy "should have been organized."

Civil Trial Postponed Indefinitely

In the civil trial, two days have already taken place. The last session was on June 17, when the trial was postponed indefinitely. An expert opinion from the field of child psychology is now to be obtained.

The original case itself attracted attention beyond the country's borders. The now 35-year-old mother is said to have beaten, tied up, gagged her son, and repeatedly locked him in a dog crate for hours. On November 22, 2022, the malnourished child was in an acutely life-threatening condition. The then twelve-year-old survived due to the intervention of a social worker who was known to the family through counseling. An acquaintance of the mother from the Waldviertel region is said to have acted as an accomplice.

Body Temperature Was 26.8 Degrees

Ultimately, the boy was transported to the Donaustadt Clinic in Vienna. Upon admission to the hospital, his body temperature was only 26.8 degrees.

The mother and her friend have already faced legal consequences. The 35-year-old was sentenced to 20 years in prison in a jury trial at the end of February 2024 for attempted murder, abuse or neglect of defenseless or younger persons, and deprivation of liberty. Her former friend received a 14-year sentence for continued violence as an accessory or instigator. In both cases, placement in a forensic-therapeutic center was initially ordered. The accomplice is no longer in preventive detention, having been conditionally released.

(APA/Red)

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.