The Hinterkaifeck Murders. Madina Fedosova

terrible secret. Maybe she tried to persuade Victoria Gabriel to turn to the authorities, and when she refused, she took a desperate step and sent an anonymous denunciation. Perhaps she hoped to save Victoria from her father’s power, even against her will. What exactly prompted Victoria Bauer to such an act – sympathy, a sense of duty, or something else – will forever remain a mystery.

      Yet another version linked the trial to the Gabriel family. Many drew attention to the fact that the case of blood revenge was initiated shortly before the birth of Cäzilia, Victoria’s daughter. This suggested that the birth of the child and the subsequent accusation were somehow connected. Klaus Briel Sr., the father of Klaus who died in the war, may have long suspected an unhealthy relationship between Victoria and her father.

      It is possible that the Gabriel family doubted Cäzilia’s paternity. Any doubt about the child’s origin could serve as a motive for revenge.

      Perhaps it was Klaus Briel Sr. who anonymously informed the authorities about the crime, wanting to avenge his son’s violated honor and protect the purity of his blood.

      Moreover, at that time, a dispute arose between the Gabriel and Gruber families over the inheritance of the deceased Klaus Jr., which could have prompted the old man to take decisive action. Perhaps this was a cunning move in the struggle for family lands, a carefully planned revenge, disguised as concern for justice.

      Some whispered about the neighboring workers who were working on the reconstruction of Hinterkaifeck in those years. Josef Steinerr, in his later testimony, confirmed that between 1908 and 1909 the farm was bustling with activity, and local residents were helping the Grubers.

      In his testimony, he stated:

      «I was well acquainted with all the residents of Hinterkaifeck,» he claimed, «and even helped them harvest, including during the war when Klaus Briel died in France.» He knew everyone except the mysterious strangers who never appeared in the Hinterkaifeck yard.

      There were rumors that old Gruber was maintaining «incest’ with his widowed daughter, and Steinerr even claimed to have seen gendarmes arrest him for it in the meadow – a case shrouded in the fog of time and casting doubt on the veracity of the memories.

      Steiner didn’t know how Victoria behaved with men after her husband’s death, but he remembered that once she was «in blessed circumstances’, and everyone in the village gossiped that the child’s father was her own father. And this concerned not Cäzilia, who had already grown up on the estate, but that boy, who died as a result of the murder… but we will return to this later. Steiner even remembered the autumn day in 1919 when he was helping to thresh grain on the farm. Then the old man Gruber dropped a strange phrase: «Oh, May Bubben («my friends’ in the local dialect’), I hardly went to sleep this night… last night a young woman gave birth… Yes, from my point of view, it would be whoever wanted it, including Bauersepp because of me!»»

      I apologize again for the previous errors. I’ve tried my best to provide you with an accurate translation of this section.

      Under «Bauersepp’, as everyone understood, Gruber meant himself, indirectly admitting his involvement in his daughter’s pregnancy and expressing dissatisfaction with the child’s father. Who this father was remained only to be guessed. But one thing was clear: the secrets of Hinterkaifeck, like a thick fog, shrouded every event, distorting and refracting the truth.

      Perhaps, during these works, amidst the noise of saws and axes, one of them managed to see or hear what was hidden behind the closed doors of the house. They watched the lives of the inhabitants of Hinterkaifeck, noticed oddities in the relationship between father and daughter, and these observations, like seeds, long sprouted in their minds.

      But why then did they remain silent for so many years? If they really witnessed a crime, why did the anonymous denunciation appear only years later? Perhaps fear of Andreas Gruber, a powerful and cruel man, forced them to remain silent. Or maybe they were just waiting for the right moment, until the burden of guilt and silence became unbearable.

      But, of course, one could not exclude the possibility that all these versions were only speculation and fantasies, born of popular rumor. Perhaps none of the people listed had anything to do with this story. Perhaps the anonymous denunciation was the work of a completely different person, whose motives and name will forever remain a secret. And, perhaps, all these assumptions and conjectures are just an attempt to fill the void created by the absence of truth.

      The Neuburg an der Donau Prosecutor’s Office filed charges as part of case number Str.P.Reg. 105/15, and on May 28, 1915, the court delivered its verdict. Andreas Gruber and Victoria Gabriel were found guilty of a crime against morality, better known as «shame on blood’. The court considered proven the fact of incestuous relations that took place between 1907 and 1910.

      Article 173 of the German Criminal Code, which was in force in those years (from January 1, 1872, to October 1, 1953), regulated the punishment for incest, that is, sexual relations between close relatives. It was under this article that Gruber and Gabriel were most likely convicted. The article stated:

      (1) Sexual intercourse between relatives in the ascending and descending line (for example, between father and daughter, grandfather and granddaughter) shall be punished for the first case by imprisonment for a term of up to five years, for the second case by imprisonment for a term of up to two years.

      (2) Sexual intercourse between relatives in the collateral line (brothers and sisters) shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of up to two years.

      (3) In addition to imprisonment, the court could deprive the convicts of civil rights.

      (4) Minor (under eighteen years of age) relatives were exempt from punishment.

      But why was incest punishable by law? The prohibition of incest has deep historical roots and is associated with a number of factors. First of all, it is concern for the health of offspring. Genetically close relatives, entering into sexual relations, increase the likelihood of transmission of recessive (hidden) genes responsible for hereditary diseases. As a result, children may be born with physical deformities, mental retardation, and other health problems.

      In addition, the prohibition of incest contributed to the maintenance of social stability. It regulated marital relations, created clear boundaries between families, and prevented conflicts over the distribution of resources and power. Incest, by destroying these boundaries, could lead to chaos and the disintegration of society.

      In a religious context, incest was often seen as a desecration, a violation of divine commandments and, as a result, a sin. In Christianity, for example, the prohibition of incest was part of the moral code and served to strengthen family values.

      The trial of Gruber and Gabriel was a stark reminder of the moral norms that prevailed in German society at that time. It reflected the struggle to preserve these norms, to protect the family and the health of future generations. But, as the history of Hinterkaifeck showed, these norms could not always withstand the dark secrets hidden in the depths of the human soul.

      Andreas Gruber, having served a year in prison for incest, returned to Hinterkaifeck. This was a slap in the face to the public, a mockery of law and morality. He seemed to be saying to everyone: «You can’t do anything to me.» And indeed, what could ordinary peasants do against a man who, it seemed, feared neither God nor the devil?

      Having returned, Gruber continued to live with Victoria as if nothing had happened. He seemed to be declaring his power over her, over the family, and over all of Hinterkaifeck. It was a demonstration of impunity that aroused only whispers of horror and disgust in the district.

      How could Victoria live with a man who had abused her, with a father who should have been despised? How could the neighbors tolerate the presence of this monster? The answer lay in the atmosphere of fear and silence that reigned in Hinterkaifeck.

      Andreas