Frankfurt homosexual trials
After the Second World War, the community was rebuilt, with well-known meeting places including the Kleist Casino at Freßgass 6 and the Felsenkeller in Luginsland 1.
[3] This led many people in Frankfurt's gay community to believe that the relevant criminal provisions were no longer applicable.
At that time the Nazi party extended § 175, so that criminality included all "lewd" acts - in extreme cases this could also be interpreted as eye contact between men.
It became clear that Blankenstein was acting as a key witness, which were not permitted under contemporary laws and thus the public reaction was negative.
In one case, the defense succeeded in enforcing a psychological report on Blankenstein in the proceedings before the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court.
The press, in particular Der Spiegel[26] and the Frankfurter Rundschau, were generally skeptical about the purpose of and motivation for the trials.
Roger Nash Baldwin, one of the co-founders of the American Civil Liberties Union, said that it was "incomprehensible that such proceedings against innocent adults in the 20th century are still possible",[27] and complained directly to the Federal Ministry of the Interior, which said it was not responsible.
As the criminal defense lawyer for a homeless man accused of same-sex prostitution with minors, his strategy in his main hearing on November 8, 1950 was to doubt the legality of the instruction of the Frankfurt District Court President.
Together with court reporter Rudolf Eims, Schmidt-Leichner then introduced his criticism of the Frankfurt judiciary to the press.
Presumably, the two men knew each other from meetings of the homophile association for humanitarian lifestyle (VhL) in the Frankfurt bar Felsenkeller, whose first chairman was the homosexual activist Heinz Meininger.
At the end of December 1950, an anonymous threatening letter was delivered to the chief public prosecutor, Hans-Krafft Kosterlitz.
As a result, the public prosecutor's office suspected Schmidt-Leichner of having written the murder threat, since they apparently attributed the defense lawyer to circles of the homophile movement.
The author of the letter may have been “connected with the circle of lawyers and journalists fighting legally and in public”, and its drastic choice of words shows “how repressive the investigative pressure exerted in the Main metropolis was perceived by those affected.” According to Speier, the letter is the manifestation of the "desperate-aggressive[...] radicalism and bitterness" of those affected by the persecution: [29] The threatening letter addressed to Kosterlitz was not only sent to the Federal President Theodor Heuss, but also leaked to the Frankfurter Rundschau and the Frankfurter Neue Presse.
Since Ronimi and Thiede were largely eliminated from the event, their possible agreements with Blankenstein no longer protected the former key witness.
[7] Omar G. Encarnación, a Professor of Political Studies at Bard College, called the trials "the most vicious episode of gay persecution in postwar Europe.
"[27] A total of six of the persecuted men committed suicide: a 19-year-old jumped from the Goethe Tower, a dental technician and his friend poisoned themselves with illuminating gas.
The play's premiere marked the first time since the Second World War ended that homosexuality was discussed on a German stage.
