The Nuremberg saw “no concrete clues” for a racist motivation of the murders

Besides a first witness in the Turgut murder case, whose testimony did not bring significant enlightenment, the head detective of the Nuremberg police in the Simsek and Özüdogru murder cases testified today. The investigation headed by him had not at all considered a possible racist motivation for the crime, especially in the Simsek case it had instead focused above all on Simsek’s family and its environment. Accordingly, harsh criticism from victims’ counsel was to be expected. Two family members of Enver Simsek followed the proceedings from the court room.

The witness still seemed to be focussed on the supposed reasons for suspicion against Simsek and his surroundings – it was only upon questioning by the presiding judge that he also said some words on the personality and personal life of the murder victim. The idea that a racist motivation might be behind the murders was not seriously followed over the years – there simply had not been any concrete the leads, the witness claimed in court.

The questions of counsel for the Simsek family focused above all on the determination that all clues and all investigations directed against the family had proven wrong. The witness will be called again to testify on later parts of the investigation; it is to be expected that further questions will follow then.

Questions by the defence did not contribute much to the proceedings. The Wohlleben defence asked the witness what percentage of murders were committed by relatives or partners of the victim – roughly 60 to 70 per cent, according to the witness. Victim’s counsel Narin proved the absurdity of this question by asking the witness what percentage of serial murders were committed by relatives or partners – none that he knew of, the witness answered. Of course, it was directly after the Özüdogro murder, and thus at the beginning of an investigation lasting years, that the police considered the crimes as serial murders.