The trial day began with an announcement by the presiding judge that Zsch\u00e4pe defense counsel Grasel had brought a challenge for alleged bias against presiding judge G\u00f6tzl over the weekend, after G\u00f6tzl had denied the latest motion to relieve Zsch\u00e4pes old defense counsel Heer, Stahl and Sturm of their duties.<\/p>\n
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: G\u00f6tzl\u2019s decision is based on the facts that Heer, Stahl and Sturm remain willing and able to defend Zsch\u00e4pe and that the breakdown of communication within the defense is due to Zsch\u00e4pe herself refusing to communicate with counsel. This is legally correct and does not show any bias on G\u00f6tzl\u2019s part, meaning that this challenge for alleged bias, too, is bound to fail.<\/p>\n
The court will likely decide on this challenge in time for the trial to resume on Thursday, the trial day tomorrow was \u2013 once more \u2013 cancelled.<\/p>\n
Today, the court continued the trial, first by reading out several interior secret service documents concerning accused Gerlach, Wohlleben, Eminger and Schultze. The presiding judge then posed some additional questions to accused Zsch\u00e4pe \u2013 most of these concerned details of her earlier statements, but he also went beyond that frame, inter alia by asking how much Andr\u00e9 Eminger and his wife Susann had known about the NSU\u2019s crimes. Zsch\u00e4pe counsel Grasel announced that the answers would be prepared in writing and then read out. The same was true for the questions of the Schultze defense, which had been asked at an earlier date \u2013 Grasel stated that he had \u201cmissed\u201d those, but that \u201cI [sic!] will also answer these questions in one go.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Challenge for alleged bias brought by the Zsch\u00e4pe defense, and questioning of Zsch\u00e4pe The trial day began with an announcement by the presiding judge that Zsch\u00e4pe defense counsel Grasel had brought a challenge for alleged bias against presiding judge G\u00f6tzl over the weekend, after G\u00f6tzl had denied the latest motion to relieve Zsch\u00e4pes old defense […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1104"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1104\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1105,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1104\/revisions\/1105"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}