A Sarco man spent ten weeks in custody on suspicion of strangulation. “Hard to understand”, say lawyers

The Schaffhausen public prosecutor’s office is investigating the first death in the death capsule. Research shows that they are taking an unusually tough approach – and are sticking to a dubious theory.

Brief overview:

• On 23. September 2024, a person died in the Sarco suicide capsule for the first time.
• On the same day, the Schaffhausen police arrested four people.
• Florian Willet, the director of The Last Resort, the euthanasia organization behind Sarco, was held in custody for ten weeks.

The story of the Sarco suicide capsule takes another unexpected turn.

At the beginning of this week, the phone of a journalist from this editorial team rings: it’s Florian Willet, the director of The Last Resort.

The new euthanasia organization in Switzerland that is behind Sarco. Willet is in hospital and asks for a personal interview.

At the moment, he does not wish to comment publicly on Sarco or his state of health. But what has happened over the last few months seems to have taken its toll on the 47-year-old’s health.

Out of respect for his privacy, this editorial team will not go into further detail about the hospital visit.

Willet was the only person present when a person committed assisted suicide in the capsule for the first time in Schaffhausen in September.

He then spent ten weeks in custody before being released on 2 December. The investigation against him is still ongoing.

But what has happened in the last few months? Why was Willet held in custody for so long?

This editorial team spoke to those involved and independent experts from the judiciary and forensic medicine and was able to inspect important documents.

The picture that emerges is of a public prosecutor’s office taking a hard line – and clinging to a strangulation theory about which there are considerable doubts.

 

Monday afternoon, 23 September 2024, it’s just before 4 p.m. Florian Willet stands quietly and looks at the iPad in his hand. He taps on the screen, opens an app and follows a flashing graphic with his index finger.

He takes out his cell phone and films the screen. Then he looks up from his iPad at what he has been working towards for a long time: the Sarco.

A few minutes ago, a seriously ill American woman climbed into the dark blue suicide capsule. It is located in a piece of forest in Merishausen in the canton of Schaffhausen.

The capsule is sealed airtight and nitrogen is flowing into the Sarco. The woman will be dead any moment.

Willet is the only person present at the first assisted suicide using a death capsule. This is confirmed by video footage that this editorial team was able to view.

They show him walking around the capsule with the iPad for a good 20 minutes. In between, he calls Sarco inventor and euthanasia activist Philip Nitschke and reports back.

He also sends him the cell phone videos. These are not just for documentation purposes – they become an essential piece of evidence.

At 4.01 p.m. the woman is dead.

Willet was in custody for ten weeks

The pictures from the forest in Schaffhausen went around the world just hours later. A mixture of astonishment and disbelief gripped Switzerland.

Because on that Monday afternoon, those responsible at Sarco ignored all warnings from the authorities. Various public prosecutors had previously threatened to open criminal proceedings in the event of a Sarco operation in their canton. Including the Schaffhausen prosecutors.

They arrested four people on the spot: In addition to Willet, these were two lawyers mandated by The Last Resort and a Dutch photographer. The latter was not present during the suicide, but was in the vicinity.

Willet, a German citizen residing in Switzerland, then had to spend a whole ten weeks in custody before being released on 2. December.

The reason: the public prosecutor suspected him of premeditated murder. This charge is much more serious than the suspicion of incitement and assisted suicide, which the Schaffhausen authorities initially communicated.

As the newspaper “de Volkskrant” revealed, investigators are looking into whether Willet strangled the deceased.

The Dutch paper covered the Sarco premiere, including with a photographer. Because the suspicion of murder was “urgent” according to the public prosecutor’s office, the investigators kept Willet in custody.

Although the suspicion is no longer “urgent”, it is still there, as First Public Prosecutor Peter Sticher confirmed on request.

Where does this theory come from? And is the action taken by the public prosecutor’s office justified?

“No interest”, public prosecutor’s office waives medical records

As surprising as the Sarco premiere in Schaffhausen was for the public, the local authorities had long been aware of the project. This is shown by a written exchange that this editorial team was able to view.

It began at the end of May through Exit International, an euthanasia organization backed by Australian activist Philip Nitschke.

It has nothing to do with the euthanasia organization of the same name established in Switzerland. Exit International pulls the strings in the background, while The Last Resort then goes public.

Those responsible at Sarco announced to the Schaffhausen public prosecutor’s office and the cantonal doctor that they wanted to carry out the first assisted suicide in a capsule in their canton.

First Public Prosecutor Sticher then writes back. He announces a “critical investigation” and threatens criminal proceedings.

The plans are leaked. On 3. July, the NZZ reports that Sarco is likely to be deployed in the same month.

On 8. July, Sticher’s subordinate and senior public prosecutor (name known to the editors) telephones a lawyer from Exit International.

He [the lawyer] offers to send the public prosecutor’s office a comprehensive dossier.

It contains the medical records of the American woman who wanted to die, proof of her capacity and a letter from her two sons accepting her wish to commit suicide.

According to a note in the file, the lead prosecutor makes it clear that he is very critical of Sarco. He did not want to see the documentation in advance.

In any case, the canton of Schaffhausen had “no interest whatsoever in Exit International providing end-of-life care in the canton of Schaffhausen, let alone opening a house for the dying”. However, a home for the dying was never an issue.

The public prosecutor’s office will not tell this editorial team why it rejected the dossier.

iPad documents oxygen content in the capsule

So on 23. September at 4.01 pm, the time has come.

The 64-year-old American woman, who suffers from a serious immune deficiency, is the first person to die in the Sarco.

According to Nitschke, he followed the assisted suicide via camera in the capsule. “It looked exactly as we expected,” Nitschke told the media afterwards. He was able to track the oxygen content in the capsule.

Via the aforementioned app on Florian Willet’s iPad.

The graphic shows the progression of the oxygen content in the capsule. This is shown by video recordings that this editorial team was able to view.

The time information is particularly important. It shows that the oxygen content in the capsule was below 10 percent for at least 26 minutes. Until well after 4 pm. If the oxygen content is this low, a person dies after just a few minutes.

This means that the capsule could not have been opened during this time. Otherwise the oxygen content would have shot up due to the incoming outside air.

Willet stays put. The two lawyers and the Dutch photographer are nearby when one of the lawyers calls the public prosecutor’s office at around 4.40 pm.

He informs them of the suicide. But nobody turns up. So the lawyer calls a second time shortly before 6 pm. Then the police show up with a large contingent, arrest all four of them and confiscate the suicide capsule.

The deceased is taken to the Institute of Forensic Medicine at the University of Zurich.

The strangulation theory

Although Willet “surrendered” to the police, the public prosecutor still suspects that Willet may have deliberately killed the woman. This also raises questions because the prosecutors must be in possession of the video recordings and Willet’s iPad and cell phone.

The “Volkskrant” did address the fact that there were interruptions in the video recordings – because the camera only filmed when there was movement. However, the recordings from the outside camera only stopped after 4.30 p.m., when the woman was already dead.

The suspicion of intentional homicide is based on a telephone conversation with a person from the Institute of Forensic Medicine. According to a telephone memo, she informed the public prosecutor’s office of the findings a few hours later.

Among other things, injuries were found on the woman’s neck. These could have been caused by a spasm. However, the findings were more likely to indicate “blunt force to the neck”. To date, the public prosecutor’s office has not received an autopsy report that would discuss the suspicion in more detail.

The video recordings and the oxygen measurement speak against a violent approach by Willet. No traces of Willet’s DNA were found on the body of the deceased.

In any case, Willet surrendered to the police, which according to legal experts makes it highly unlikely that he could have strangled the woman.

Ulrich Zollinger is a professor emeritus of forensic medicine. He has investigated numerous unusual deaths, including deceased people who died with the established Swiss exit organization.

“In my 30 years, I have never discovered anything unusual that would have made a post-mortem necessary.”

On the other hand, he can understand why people are taking a closer look at Sarco “because of the topicality and explosive nature of the first application”.

But precisely because the case was so interesting and had resulted in a lengthy period of pre-trial detention, he could not understand why no post-mortem report had been submitted for so long.

Zollinger is sceptical about the suspicion of strangulation. “I can’t imagine that an assisted dying person would want to and be able to cause death in this way.”

In addition, there would have been video footage of the place of death after the woman got into the Sarco. “If someone had helped, this would have been recorded.”

Bernhard Rütsche, a professor of public law at the University of Lucerne, finds the suspicion “difficult to understand”. He has already published several articles on euthanasia and says: “The suspicion, which is apparently based on a phone call, seems to be a pretext.”

In order to justify a ten-week pre-trial detention, a partial forensic report or other solid evidence would have to be available.

The public prosecutor’s office also refused to question Philip Nitschke.

Although, according to The Last Resort, he was the only person who was in direct contact with Willet during the first Sarco operation – and could therefore potentially provide information relevant to the investigation.

Unusual methods

Not even the defendants’ lawyers know what evidence the public prosecutor’s office has.

To date, they have not been granted access to the files, although they have requested it several times.

It is common practice that evidence is initially withheld from the defence until the accused has been questioned about it.

But Rütsche calls it “highly unusual” that the lawyers have still not been granted access.

He suspects that the public prosecutor’s office wants to set an example. “They may be under pressure to crack down on this form of assisted suicide.”

This is not the first time that the public prosecutors involved have been criticized for unusual methods.

The leading public prosecutor* in Schaffhausen has a controversial history from his time as a public prosecutor in Thurgau.

He led the proceedings in the so-called Kümmertshausen case, the largest criminal trial ever in Thurgau. It involved a homicide, human trafficking, gang crime and much more.

However, the Federal Supreme Court removed him and a colleague from the investigation in 2015 – due to “numerous and in some cases blatant procedural errors”.

They were subsequently tried for multiple counts of abuse of office and falsification of documents, but were acquitted in 2023.

The Schaffhausen public prosecutor’s office leaves an extensive list of questions unanswered. And invokes official and investigative secrecy.

* De Volkskrant earlier named the lead prosecutor as Andreas Zuber.