A recent attack by Islamist extremist Abdul Ballout has raised serious questions about the judgment of German authorities. Despite being known to law enforcement and recently appearing in court, Ballout was assessed as “influenceable” – meaning potentially steerable away from extremism – until the moment he committed the attack. This misjudgment appears to be central to the failure to prevent the act of violence. The case highlights a dangerous reliance on the idea of rehabilitation potential even when individuals demonstrate concerning beliefs and behaviors. Authorities seemingly underestimated the risk posed by Ballout, prioritizing attempts at reintegration over preventative measures. This chronicle details how this fatal miscalculation allowed a known extremist to carry out an attack, sparking scrutiny of security and judicial processes. The incident prompts a reevaluation of risk assessment strategies within the German justice system.