Austrian nationals Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer were acquitted on Tuesday of a charge of disobedience to a lawful order by the Banjul Magistrates’ Court. The court upheld a no-case submission made by their legal team, concluding a significant legal proceeding. Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer were accordingly discharged and acquitted of all charges related to the case. This decision by the Banjul Magistrates’ Court marked the end of the legal battle for the Austrian couple.
The Alleged Disobedience
Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer were charged under Section 109 of the Criminal Offences Act 2025. This specific section of the law deals with the offence of disobedience to lawful orders. Police had alleged that the Austrian nationals failed to comply with a court order issued on July 21, 2025. The court order specifically directed the accused to open or provide the password to a laptop. This particular laptop was being investigated in connection with alleged fraud and theft involving cryptocurrency transactions. The order required them to provide details of their cryptocurrency accounts and wallets as part of the ongoing investigation into these financial irregularities. The prosecution’s case hinged on the assertion that the Mitterers had not adhered to these explicit directives.
Evidence Presented in Court
Evidence presented by prosecution witnesses indicated that Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer had opened the laptop and subsequently provided its password after consulting their lawyers. These witnesses also acknowledged that the accused had provided a device described as a "box" and a stick, which were used to access the cryptocurrency account. Police witnesses admitted during testimony that the laptop in question was successfully opened. This admission was a critical point in the defence’s argument, as it directly contradicted the core allegation of disobedience.
One witness further confirmed that the accused individuals had accessed the cryptocurrency account while in police custody, utilizing the device they had provided. This demonstrated a further level of cooperation from the Mitterers. However, investigators stated they were unable to access the cryptocurrency account themselves after receiving the laptop password from the Mitterers. No evidence was presented in court to clarify the reasons why investigators could not access the cryptocurrency account despite having the password and the associated devices. The lack of explanation for this inability to access the account became a notable gap in the prosecution's evidence. The magistrate observed that the prosecution’s case did not sufficiently address this point, which could have shed more light on the alleged non-compliance.
Magistrate's Rationale for Acquittal
The magistrate presiding over the case determined that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case sufficient to require Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer to present a defence. This finding meant that the prosecution had failed to provide enough initial evidence to support its claims. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to provide adequate evidence demonstrating that the accused had disobeyed the court’s order issued on July 21, 2025. This order had specifically directed the Mitterers to open a laptop, provide its password, and disclose details of their cryptocurrency accounts and wallets. The magistrate held that the prosecution did not present sufficient evidence to show that the accused had disobeyed the court’s order.
The court observed that the accused individuals had, in fact, complied with the specific requirements contained in the court order. Evidence presented during the trial indicated that the Mitterers had opened the laptop and provided its password. Additionally, they supplied a device and a stick necessary for accessing their cryptocurrency account. Police witnesses confirmed that the laptop was successfully opened and that the accused had accessed the cryptocurrency account while in custody using the provided devices. The magistrate's decision hinged on the finding that the actions of Manuel Di Stofleth Mitterer and Angelika Mitterer aligned with the demands of the court order, thus negating the charge of disobedience. The lack of clarity regarding the investigators' inability to access the cryptocurrency account, despite the Mitterers providing the necessary tools and information, further weakened the prosecution's argument of non-compliance.
