Real Crime Stories/Paranormal Hauntings

Fritz Haarmann: The Butcher of Hanover (Part II)

Although Haarmann denied any premeditation in the crimes and remained adamant the ultimate reason he killed was a "mystery" to him, he readily confessed to having killed 14 of the victims for whose murder he was tried and to retaining and selling many of their possessions, although he denied having sold the body parts of any of his victims as contraband meat. Haarmann's denial that he had either consumed or sold human flesh would be supported by a medical expert, who testified on 6 December that none of the meat found in Haarmann's apartment following his arrest was human.

When asked to identify photographs of his victims, Haarmann became taciturn and dismissive as he typically claimed to be unable to recognize any of his victims' photographs; however, in instances where he claimed to be unable to recognize his victims' faces but the victims' clothing or other personal belongings had been found in his possession, he would simply shrug and make comments to the effect of, "I probably killed him," or: "Charge it to me; it's alright with me." For example, when asked to identify a photograph of victim Alfred Hogrefe, Haarmann stated: "I certainly assume I killed Hogrefe, but I don't remember his face."

Numerous exhibits were introduced into evidence in the opening days of the trial, including 285 sections of the skeletal structure—particularly skulls and thigh bones—recovered from the Leine River and forensically determined as belonging to young men under 20 years of age which had been retrieved from the Leine River, the bucket into which he stored and transported human remains, and the extensively bloodstained camp bed upon which he had killed many of the victims at his Rote Reihe address. As had been the case when earlier asked whether he could recognize the photographs of any of his victims, Haarmann's demeanor became dismissive upon the introduction of these exhibits; he denied any of the skulls introduced into evidence belonged to his victims, stating he had almost invariably "mashed" the victims' skulls, and had thrown only one undamaged skull into the river.

Several acquaintances and criminal associates of Haarmann testified for the prosecution, including former neighbors who testified to having purchased brawn or mince from Haarmann, whom they noted regularly left his apartment with packages of meat, but rarely arrived with them. Haarmann's landlady, Elisabeth Engel, testified that Haarmann would regularly pour chopped pieces of meat into boiling water and would strain fat from meat Haarmann claimed was pork. This fat would invariably be poured into bottles. On one occasion in April 1924, Haarmann's landlady and her family became ill after eating sausages in skins Haarmann claimed were sheep's intestines. Another neighbor testified to the alarming number of youths whom he had seen entering Haarmann's Neue Straße apartment, but whom he seldom observed leaving the address. This neighbor assumed Haarmann was selling youths to the Foreign Legion; another neighbor testified to having observed Haarmann throw a sack of bones into the Leine River. Two female acquaintances of Hans Grans also testified how, on one occasion in 1923, they discovered what they believed to be a human mouth boiling in a soup kettle in Haarmann's apartment; these witnesses testified they had taken the item to Hanover police, who simply replied the piece of flesh maybe a pig's snout.

By the second week of the trial, testimony began to focus upon the extent of police knowledge of the criminal activities Haarmann engaged upon following his 1918 release from prison and issues relating to the trust bestowed upon him. Until Haarmann was arrested for sexual assault upon Karl Fromm and his apartment searched, the police seemingly never seriously suspected that the individual responsible for the sharp increase in missing person cases relating to boys and young men filed in Hanover in 1923 and 1924, or the discovery of more than 500 human bones in and around the Leine River in May and June 1924, was actually an individual whom they regarded as a trusted informant, despite the fact, some of the victims were last seen in his company, and that he had amassed a lengthy criminal record for various criminal offenses including sexual assault and battery.