Kürt Erich Tetzner

Kürt Erich Tetzner

Murderer
1known / alleged victims
Case Facts
Gender
male
Country
Germany
Location
Regensburg, Bavaria, Germany
Date of birth
???
Characteristics
attempt to collect insurance money
Victim profile
A n unidentified man
Method of murder
Ligature strangulation
Date(s) of murder
November 25, 1929
Years active
1929
Date of arrest
December 4, 1929
Status
Executed

Executed by guillotine on May 2, 1931

Case Summary

Case details

Kürt Erich Tetzner (also known as Stranelli) was a German businessman born in 1903 and executed in 1931. He was convicted of fraud and assault murder for killing an unidentified man as part of an insurance fraud.

Background

Tetzner had committed an earlier insurance fraud in which he convinced his mother-in-law to postpone an operation for cancer so that he could insure her life. She subsequently underwent an operation and died. After his first effort was successful, Tetzner and his wife decided to find another victim.

The offence

After failing once to entrap a victim, on Nov. 25, 1929, Tetzner picked up a hitchhiker. He murdered the hitchhiker, crashed his car into a tree, and then set it on fire with the victim at the wheel.

Investigation

Suspicion arose after Tetzner’s wife claimed that the victim was her husband and attempted to claim the death benefit on Tetzner’s accident policies. Physical discrepancies between the victim and Tetzner caused suspicion. Using recently developed forensic medicine techniques, officials determined by the condition of the victim’s lungs that the victim had been dead before the fire.

Tetzner hid in Strasbourg, France, using the assumed name of Stranelli while the case was ongoing.

Arrest

Tetzner was apprehended in Strasbourg by police. He readily confessed.

Trial

Tetzner was tried in March 1931. The court found him Guilty.

Sentencing

Tetzner was put to death at Regensburg on May 2, 1931.

Outcome

Kürt Erich Tetzner was executed by guillotine on May 2, 1931.

Aftermath

Tetzner’s wife attempted to claim a death benefit on Tetzner’s accident policies by stating that the victim was her husband. Officials concluded that the victim had been dead before the fire based on forensic findings about the victim’s lungs.

Spotted an error, or have more information about this case?