Assassination Site Exposed—Then Silence

A German court just sent a man to prison for running a secret “Assassination Politics” site on the dark web that posted death lists of politicians and put bounties on their heads.

Story Snapshot

German man gets three-year sentence for running darknet “Assassination Politics” platform with death lists of leaders.
Site posted “death sentences,” explosive guides, and sensitive personal data for targets like Angela Merkel and Olaf Scholz.
Case shows how European governments treat online extremist speech more like terrorism than protected expression.
Free speech and privacy rules in Germany limit public view of evidence and any defense the accused may have raised.

German court sends darknet ‘death list’ operator to prison

A court in Duesseldorf has sentenced a 50-year-old German-Polish man, known only as Martin S., to three years in prison for running a darknet platform called “Assassination Politics.” The court said he posted online “death sentences” that openly called for assassinations of political leaders, including former Chancellor Angela Merkel and former Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and used the site to incite attacks on public figures and officials across Germany.^[6]

According to the court, Martin S. admitted during trial that he operated the covert site on the dark web, a part of the internet that needs special software and is often used by criminals.^[6]^[4] Prosecutors and earlier reports said that, starting around June 2025, he used the platform to encourage violence against politicians and other public figures, treating the site itself as a hub for extremist agitation rather than just private ranting or anonymous venting.^[4]

How the ‘Assassination Politics’ platform worked

Prosecutors said Martin S. published lists of names and personal data of more than twenty potential victims, including top politicians, judges, and state prosecutors.^[2]^[8] On the site he posted so-called “death sentences” he wrote himself, accusing targets of crimes such as “high treason,” and then framed their killing as a form of punishment. The platform mixed these posts with far-right and conspiracy material, including themes tied to COVID-19 and anti-state ideology.^[4]^[9]

Reports say the site also provided instructions on how to build explosives and other weapons, including guidance similar to recipes for Molotov cocktails, and treated these how‑to posts as tools for carrying out the “sentences.”^[6]^[1] Prosecutors described the operation as more than hateful speech; they charged him with financing terrorism, giving instructions for serious violent acts that endanger the state, and dangerous handling of personal data by publishing sensitive details about possible victims.^[3]^[6]

Crypto bounties and the terrorism-financing charges

Authorities said Martin S. did not just talk about violence; he tried to put a price on it. On the darknet platform he asked users to donate cryptocurrency, which he promised would be used as rewards, or bounties, for anyone who killed people named on his lists.^[1]^[7] This bounty structure is what led federal prosecutors to treat the case as terrorism financing, even if the total sums or any completed attacks have not been detailed in public reports.^[3]

The platform’s model fits into a wider but still rare pattern of online “kill list” or hitman-style sites exposed in recent years. Researchers who studied similar assassination markets on the dark web have found that some are scams, but some real orders do lead to arrests and prison sentences.^[16] That broader record helps explain why German prosecutors treated a mix of death lists, bomb guides, and crypto bounties as an active threat, not just ugly speech locked away in a corner of the internet.^[4]

Free speech, secrecy, and what the public still cannot see

The Duesseldorf judgment confirms that the German state now treats this kind of online incitement as a terrorism problem, not just a speech issue, especially after earlier far-right killings of politicians inside Germany raised alarm.^[3]^[9] At the same time, German privacy and secrecy rules keep many case files sealed, so the public cannot fully inspect how investigators tied Martin S. to the site, how much money moved through the wallets, or how the court weighed any defense arguments that his posts were exaggerated or not meant to be taken literally.^[4]^[8]

For Americans watching from a country with strong First Amendment traditions, this case is a reminder of how different speech and security law looks in Europe. German authorities are quick to frame far-right online platforms as extremist threats to the state and to criminalize not only violent acts but also digital “death lists,” crypto fundraising, and publishing of personal information.^[4]^[7] Supporters say that protects officials from targeted violence, while critics worry it gives governments a broad tool to police speech they label “extremist.”