A rare day without a challenge for alleged bias

Today, the trial was once more interrupted very early upon motion of the Wohlleben defense, who announced their intention to challenge the presiding judge and another member of the bench for alleged bias. However, it seems that the defense realized that such a challenge would invite ridicule – after the break, they stated that they would not bring such challenges after all.

The court then continued the questioning of witness Mario Brehme (on his earlier court appearances see the reports of 15 July 2015 and 14 October 2015). Last time, he had been asked whether he had worked for a secret service agency as an informer. The court had in the meantime asked all secret service agencies whether Brehme had worked for them, which all of them had denied. Therefore Brehme’s appearance today only lasted a few minutes and did not provide him another opportunity for Nazi propaganda. Continue reading →

Challenge for alleged bias brought by the Zschäpe defense, and questioning of Zschäpe

The trial day began with an announcement by the presiding judge that Zschäpe defense counsel Grasel had brought a challenge for alleged bias against presiding judge Götzl over the weekend, after Götzl had denied the latest motion to relieve Zschäpes old defense counsel Heer, Stahl and Sturm of their duties.

Since the reasons for the several such motions throughout the proceedings remain more or less the same, a short comment on these issues is sufficient: Götzl’s decision is based on the facts that Heer, Stahl and Sturm remain willing and able to defend Zschäpe and that the breakdown of communication within the defense is due to Zschäpe herself refusing to communicate with counsel. This is legally correct and does not show any bias on Götzl’s part, meaning that this challenge for alleged bias, too, is bound to fail.

Continue reading →

The court has canceled all trial days this week as it needs time to deal with the two challenges for alleged bias brought last Thursday.

More meritless challenges for alleged bias by the Wohlleben defense – and more vacuous and unbelievable statements by accused Zschäpe

Today the court had planned to hear the testimony of two federal police detectives and, above all, the answers of the Zschäpe defense to questions by the court.

However, parties had to wait quite a long time for the latter: The Wohlleben defense asked for a number of longer interruptions and finally brought a challenge for alleged bias against presiding judge Götzl – he had had words with defense counsel Nahrath earlier, which had ended with Nahrath, in a snit, stating that he would simply not say anything after all. The defense then brought another challenge against one of the other judges – this challenge, which is just as meritless as the first, is based on a claim that she had made faces when the first challenge was read out. Continue reading →

On the importance of the Gerlach’s and Schultze’s statements

The trial day began with an announcement by presiding judge Götzl that judge Feistkorn had retired – one of the two remaining alternate judges, judge Kramer, has therefore been activated and joined the bench; he will take part in future decisions in this case, including the judgment.
The court only heard one witness today, a prosecutor who worked with the federal prosecution during the investigation. He was called to testify on the extent to which the statements by accused Gerlach and Schultze had helped the investigation. His answer was that they had helped quite a bit, above all that the arrest warrant against Ralf Wohlleben would not have been issued were it not for their statements, which were then confirmed by further investigations. Continue reading →

German Angst – Ralf Wohlleben decides not to answer all questions after all.

The further questioning of Ralf Wohlleben began rather slowly – the presiding judge asked further questions concerning Wohlleben’s statement on 16 December 2015.
Wohlleben confirmed some of the main results of the evidence taken so far, which had massively incriminated him. Above all, he confirmed his knowledge of all relevant acts of support provided to Zschäpe, Böhnhardt and Mundlos – he knew when and in what amounts money was provided for them, he knew, who was in contact with them, he stated that he had believed that had lived in Chemnitz (as they in fact did). This again shows his important role in the support network – a role which his defense has tried to deny since the early days of the trial, only to be disproven by the evidence.

Continue reading →

Wohllebens attempts to deny the charges leads him to a partial admission of guilt.

Today accused Wohlleben was questioned by the court. On 16 December 2015, Wohlleben had read out a prepared statement and announced that he would answer questions (see the report of [link] 16 December 2015). Presiding judge Götzl questioned Wohlleben until 2.30 pm, when the trial day was adjourned as counsel Klemke had announced that Wohlleben was suffering from back pain and headaches and was unable to concentrate. Klemke’s intervention came shortly after Wohlleben had seriously painted himself into a corner in answering questions concerning the Ceska murder weapon.

But back to the beginning: The presiding judge largely limited himself to asking questions to clear up issues in the statement read out by Wohlleben that remained unclear. In the morning, the main topic was the political vita of Wohlleben, the “Comradeship Jena”, the “Thuringia Home Guard” etc. Wohlleben was surprisingly restrained as far as propaganda statement were concerned, mostly tried to present the activities of the various Nazi groups as unspectacular and strictly non-violent. Continue reading →

The Court does not question the accused today – instead it considers other pieces of evidence which will contribute to finding them guilty.

Those who had hoped that the court would question accused Zschäpe and Wohlleben today were due for a disappointment: Wohlleben’s questioning was pushed to tomorrow on request of his defense attorneys, and as for Zschäpe, who will only answer questions in writing anyway, her defense team still seems to have a need for further discussion concerning the rather few questions posed by the presiding judge. The court instead read out several documents, above all concerning identification of finger print, which will contribute to proving the guilt of these two as well as co-accused André Eminger.

Continue reading →

André Eminger supported and revered the NSU. And Wohlleben’s personal details in brief.

The trial day today was short and rather uneventful. A federal police detective detailed what documents had been used concerning accused Gerlach. The federal prosecutor’s office added that some of the documents, e.g. of the federal secret service, were still “on the way” to the court.

Another detective described a portrait of Böhnhardt and Mundlos, drawn in pencil or coal, with the slogan “Unforgotten” and a rune, found in Eminger’s apartment. The picture had been hung on the wall over some shelves, leading to an altar-like installation. When asked whether he was consented to these items being taken into evidence, Eminger had had a “serious outbreak”, accordingly the police had only taken pictures. Continue reading →

I! Am! A Victim! Accused Wohlleben claims to be entirely innocent.

Accused Ralf Wohlleben read out his statement on the charges against him today, taking parties by surprise that he did so already today. Wohlleben has stated that he will answer questions by all participants in the trial, but only answer questions concerning his personal life tomorrow as he would need to prepare further to answer questions concerning the charges.

Wohlleben denies the charges against him, claiming that he had helped his friends go undercover, but that he had never believed possible that they would commit crimes like these. He also admitted having given accused Carsten Schultze a hint where he could by a gun, but claimed to have believed that Uwe Böhnhardt only needed that gun to kill himself in case of impending arrest. He himself, Wohlleben claimed, had always argued against violence, especially xenophobic violence, both privately and in his politics. Continue reading →