Rapes over several years – the diocese of Regensburg is threatened with the next lawsuit for damages

The person concerned demands a six-figure sum. He is a recognized victim of abuse and was raped for years at the Domspatzen boarding school.

Regensburg – After the million-dollar lawsuit filed by former Domspatzen Matthias Podszus, the diocese of Regensburg will soon be confronted with another legal dispute over compensation for violence and sexual abuse. Manfred van Hove, now 79, is demanding, initially out of court, a six-figure sum for what was done to him at the Domspatzen preschool in Etterzhausen and at the Domprebende boarding school in Regensburg.

In 2010, he was one of the first to publicly denounce the systematic sexual abuse that had existed at the Domspatzen for decades. Among other things, van Hove appeared on the Markus Lanz talk show.

Raped at the Domspatzen: The person affected wrote “Protocol of a destroyed childhood”

In a small, self-published booklet (“Your little child came. Protocol of a destroyed childhood”) he documented his harrowing experiences that took place in Etterzhausen from 1952 to 1954 and in the Domspatzen boarding school in Regensburg until 1958.

Humiliation and violence in elementary school, regular rape by the spiritual prefect in Regensburg, Friedrich Zeitler. He was also the children's confessor and sought out his victims this way, as you can read in van Hove. The abuse of Manfred, then ten years old, lasted several years.

Serial offenders were allowed to work at the church again after serving prison time

At least since the report by Domspatzen investigator Ulrich Weber, Zeitler has been known as a serial abuser and violent perpetrator, over whom those responsible in the diocese have long held their protective hand.

Van Hove describes the child rapist in the priest's coat as chubby, with a face that had “something piggy-like.” He was addicted to cigar smoke and kept a “veritable harem” of underage boys.

Friedrich Zeitler was sentenced to three years in prison in 1959 after, according to the press spokesman, citing a newspaper article in the Regensburger Woche, he was “caught engaging in immoral acts with two of his protégés.” His civil rights were revoked for four years. For just as long, Zeitler was forbidden from coming into contact with people under the age of 21.

“Failure to control, consciously looking the other way and suppressing information”

Before the four-year period had expired, the child rapist was able to return to the fold of the church and was assigned to a girls' high school in Switzerland. Manfred van Hove only found out about all this decades later. The children were never questioned, he says. The perpetrator was simply put aside.

“There are and will always be pedophile offenders.” “These are the actions of a few individual perpetrators,” writes van Hove in his book. “In the case of the Regensburger Domspatzen, however, a system of control failure, consciously looking the other way and suppressing information made the number of many victims possible in the first place.” They feel safe under the umbrella of the choir spirit and were not brought in through internal knowledge, but only through the secular justice system stopped their criminal actions.”

Where there is planing, shavings fall, say a proverb. “The sacrifices were the chips that could fall in consideration of a greater cause.” They were means to an end that stood above all else.”

The recognition commission awarded van Hove 15,000 euros – “how cheap is my fate”

The Independent Commission for Recognition Services in Bonn classified van Hove's descriptions two and a half years ago as plausible and credible. “In view of the crimes described and their consequences as well as the handling of the case by the responsible persons,” he was awarded a so-called recognition payment of 15,000 euros – “a voluntary performance, (…) without the recognition of a legal obligation,” as it expressly states.

“I was astonished to note how cheaply you assessed my fate as part of Zeitler’s harem,” van Hove later wrote to the commission. The immediate reason: A much-quoted decision by the Cologne Regional Court, in which the archdiocese there was ordered to pay 300,000 euros to a person affected by abuse. The Archdiocese of Cologne had previously expressly waived the defense of statute of limitations. The former Domspatz Matthias Podszus also refers to this decision.

The person concerned wrote to Bishop Voderholzer…

First, Manfred von Hove wrote a letter directly to Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer, pointing out the “bizarre difference” between the 15,000 euros in recognition that the commission had awarded him and the 300,000 euros in compensation that the Cologne Regional Court referred to in another case saw as appropriate.

Van Hove wrote to the Bishop of Regensburg that he “did not want to waste the years that were left to him in his old age on arguments and lawsuits if it could be avoided.” “I would therefore prefer an out-of-court settlement if you agree to this.” This should be “close to” the Cologne decision.

(By the way: Our Regensburg newsletter informs you about all developments, news and stories from the world heritage city.)

…but he only responded negatively and didn't want to talk

Van Hove received no response from Rudolf Voderholzer himself. Instead, in a brief letter from the head of the child and youth protection department, he is informed that, apart from the commission's recognition procedure, “no further out-of-court agreements” are being made. Strange: An almost identical letter was also sent to the former Domspatzen Matthias Podszus in advance of his lawsuit.

Now van Hove has also commissioned a law firm to represent his interests. In a current letter, which is available to our editorial team, the Berlin lawyers advise the diocese to reconsider its position. Basically, an obligation to pay damages was already given by the Cologne decision.

Against this background, it is assumed that the diocese of Regensburg will not invoke the statute of limitations in the event of a legal dispute, wrote the lawyers, who request feedback by mid-January. If the diocese sticks to its stance, the client will be advised to file a lawsuit. And, as of today, van Hove will almost certainly try to do just that. “I am in the fortunate position that I can finance such a process on my own.”