Daily Archives: 9. March 2017

9 March 2017

Challenge for alleged bias by the Zschäpe defense, and: court cancels trial days, trial to continue on 23 March 2017

After the Wohlleben defense had challenged all judges for alleged bias yesterday, Zschäpe’s defense counsel Heer today read out his client’s challenge against the presiding judge. This challenge too is based largely on the deadline for further motions, seen against the background of the not very speedy way the trial was conducted in recent months.

The rest of the trial day consisted mostly of one break after another – 30 minutes for “internal consultations” of the defense teams, 25 minutes for the court to draft a decision denying a 20 minute break, and so on.

What remains: to gain time for all challenges to be considered, the court canceled the trial days on 14 to 16 March and 21/22 March 2017, the trial will continue on 23 March 2017. Continue reading

8 March 2017

Challenges for alleged bias: Wohlleben today, Zschäpe tomorrow.

Today accused Wohlleben challenged all judges for alleged bias based on their decisions rejecting two defense motions for evidence, as well as the presiding judge alone based on the time limit fixed yesterday.

Zschäpe defense counsel announced – apparently after having actually communicated with his client first – that Zschäpe will also challenge the judges, but that the defense needed more time to prepare the challenge. The trial will therefore continue tomorrow at 11 am.

Whether these challenges will need to some or all trial days of next being canceled remains to be seen. The presiding judge has already announced that the time limit set tomorrow will be extended, without giving more details.

7 March 2017

The court ups the pressure to finish the trial. And: motion for evidence on the “attack after the attack” in the Keupstraße in Cologne.

Today the court first introduced into evidence some documents: on the one hand, based on a motion by the Wohlleben defense, it read out a Nazi party press release penned by Wohlleben containing ethnopluralist rhetoric. On the other hand, and more relevant for the judgment, the court considered a list of “clips” to be extracted from the “Pink Panther” TV series and thorough instructions for doing so. Everything points to these “clips” being the one Zschäpe offered to cut in a bet and therefore to Zschäpe being involved in the production of the video with which the NSU claimed responsibility for its crimes.

Continue reading