On a miserable winter's day in Karlsfeld, southern Bavaria, in January 2015 a gust of wind tore open a woman’s car door in a parking lot and slammed it into the next vehicle, Süddeutsche Zeitung reports.
The owner of the car that was struck approached the 34-year-old architect and asked her to pay for the damages.
But, seeing no damage with her own eyes, she tried to drive off.
That was when a young man in a jumper and jogging bottoms stepped in. He claimed he was a police officer and showed her his ID to prove it.
He had seen the events and wanted to see the woman’s papers.
But she refused, not believing him to be a real officer.
“What the hell do you take me for?” she told him as she got back into her car and started to drive away, a Munich regional court heard earlier this week.
The two men tried to stop her by standing behind the car, but she defiantly drove slowly on.
The men ended up having to dive out of the way, but not before the car had collided with the other driver’s shin.
Not stopping to check if he was alright, the architect fled the scene.
“I felt victimised”
“I made a mistake that day,” the woman admitted to the Munich regional court.
But the judges weren't in the mood for lenience. She was convicted of minor aggravated battery and handed a €8,550 fine to be paid daily for 90 days as well as a two-month driving ban.
Initially the fine stood at a meagre €5,600 to be paid over 70 days, but the architect, in her typically anarchistic way, refused to accept this.
The prosecution appealed that it was too low, she claimed it was too high.
This elevated the importance of the case within the court and, after a second look, the judge decided on a higher fine.
The woman apologised for her behaviour in the parking lot, adding that she was unaware that an off-duty police officer in plainclothes could simply show his ID and become on duty.
Judge Martin Hofmann said that the woman just driving away from the scene was “completely stupid.”
“I completely got the wrong end of the stick,” replied the defendant, nodding.
The judge questioned why the architect wouldn’t accept the initial fine.
“I felt victimised by the officer at the time,” she explained, also saying that his appearance “didn’t fit the picture of a police officer.”
But Judge Hofmann disagreed, saying “the police officer did the right thing.”