Facts
By penal order dated September 30, 2005, A.S. was fined by the Office of the Investigating Magistrate IV of the Bernese Oberland for not maintaining a sufficient distance when driving a passenger car on the A6 motorway. The President of the Court 6 of the Judicial District X Thun confirmed the penal order on November 22, 2006. On appeal by A.S., the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Bern fully upheld the first instance judgment on May 24, 2007.
A.S. filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Supreme Court and requested that the judgment of the Cantonal Court be set aside and that he be acquitted. He submitted a letter from his father B.S. dated June 22, 2007, in which he states that he had driven the vehicle involved in the offense and not his son A.S.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court does not enter into the appeal, as the confession of the appellant's father submitted by the appellant constitutes a genuine factual novelty, which is irrelevant in the present appeal proceedings pursuant to Art. 99 para. 1 BGG.
The Federal Supreme Court states that new facts and evidence may only be presented to the extent that the contested decision gave rise to them. The…