Maja T., a nonbinary anti-fascist activist from Germany, has been sentenced to eight years in prison in Budapest. The trial has been controversial and has political implications.
What I could not find in articles published in English is a mention of the very thin line of evidence. From Tagesschau (German article, translated with Deepl):
Little incriminating evidence
During the trial, the prosecution presented little evidence. Neither witness statements nor DNA evidence incriminated the accused. The prosecution argued on the basis of circumstantial evidence based on footage from a security camera near one of the crime scenes.
The prosecution stated that Maja T. could be seen in these images together with other attackers. The defence countered that the person who was supposed to be T. clearly did not have a weapon with her.
The German supreme court basically mentioned 2 reasons why the extradition was illegal:
Both reasons are enough to block the extradition on their own, but by mentioning them both the cort is solidifying precedent for future cases where only one applies. Also if the police wants to lie that they didn’t know of the conditions beforehand they would still be in the wrong.