25 February 2014

„Yes, I got them the damn gun“

This trial day was mainly concerned with the testimony of two police detectives who had questioned witness Andreas Schultz. Schultz, a Nazi who had provided Wohlleben and Schultze with the silenced Ceska pistol, refused to testify in court on 28 January 2014, relying on the privilege against self-incrimination. Now his statements to the police are being introduced via the detectives who had questioned him. The Wohlleben defense made no attempt to stop this procedure.

Mr. Bernhardt, a detective of the Thuringia office of criminal investigations, was involved in the first police interview of Schultz. At that time, Schultz had at first completely denied having provided a gun. However, the detective relayed, Schultze had then apparently been concerned about his new job, his relationship and his livelihood and had finally shouted out “Yes, I got them the damn gun”.

In a later interview, he had provided further testimony incriminating Wohlleben and Schultze: Wohlleben had come to Schultz, accompanied by a young man later identified as Carsten Schultze, and had asked for a gun, which Schultze had later picked up together with 50 rounds of ammunition. However, in that interview Schultz had still claimed that he had bought the pistol from “a Yugoslav”, and he had not mentioned the silencer which Wohlleben and Schultze had also asked for. Schultze had known Wohlleben, Böhnhardt, Mundlos, Zschäpe, Kapke and the people surrounding them as politically active Nazis from the „Thuringia Homeguard“; by contrast, he had described himself as more „lifestyle oriented.”

Another detective, who had participated in later interviews with Schultz, was sent home due to lack of time and will be heard later on.

Tomorrow will see the testimony of Mandy Struck, who is suspected of supporting a terrorist organization and against whom there is still an investigation. Several victims’ counsel had moved that that case file be made part of the Munich case file. The federal prosecutor’s office opposed this motion and instead presented a rather thin investigation report dated May 2013, which did not show that any further investigative steps had been taken.

According to this report, then, the investigation against Struck could have been formally concluded in May 2013. It is entirely unclear whether this investigation against Struck, but also against other accused supporters of the NSU, is only being formally continued and will be dropped without much ado in the future or whether there are still active investigations into their support of the NSU. In the case of Struck, certain acts of support have been proven, but are subject to the statute of limitations – accordingly the question in her case is how long her contact with and support of the NSU continued. Once again, the federal prosecutor is keeping all parties in the dark.