Definition of the problem: The paper addresses a problem well known to psychotherapists, a conflict between trauma therapy and criminal justice. Traumatized patients are often summoned as witnesses in criminal proceedings dealing with the traumatizing event. This frequently creates a trauma therapeutic dilemma: Should they undergo pretrial therapy, or should they wait until the trial has commenced and they have testified? Pretrial therapy is in the best interest of their health; it may prevent or attenuate trauma-related disorders. However, it has a legal side-effect: The testimony loses credibility, as therapeutic interventions may alter memories of the event. Arguments: The contours of the dilemma are highlighted, especially the problem of credibility assessment following therapy in the German Criminal Justice System, based on the so-called Undeutsch hypothesis. Because of a range of false memory cases, German courts have defined quite high thresholds for credibility assessments. Once therapy has involved elements of confrontation or exposition, in which memories are altered, new memories are learned, or the content of the memory has been imaginatively transformed, credibility of the testimony can no long be affirmed. Conclusion: The paper suggests an extrajudicial solution: Trauma therapy should explore means for a preconfrontation documentation of the traumatizing event. For this, a software app should be developed which enables patients to provide a report—in the absence of the therapists, but embedded in the therapy—about the events. This do-it-yourself record of an untainted testimony could be used for credibility assessments and allow patients to undergo pretrial therapy. It may also be used as evidence in court, under particular conditions of the German Code of Criminal Procedure.