Today the court heard the answers by the Zsch\u00e4pe defense to the court\u2019s most recent questions. Again not a job well-done by defense counsel Grasel and Borchert: their answers again added events which Zsch\u00e4pe had not even mentioned in passing before even though they seem rather hard to forget (in this case a fight between Uwe Mundlos and Uwe B\u00f6hnhardt, which Zsch\u00e4pe \u201cwould rather not describe in detail\u201d), and they again tried to explain away obvious inconsistencies by claiming that they had simply reported Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019s \u201csuppositions\u201d (in this case Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019s claiming earlier that Mundlos had made photos of the murders, while at the same time claiming that she had not known anything about the murders).<\/p>\n
Those present in the courtroom were surprised when counsel Borchert then announced that his client wished to say something herself. Zsch\u00e4pe read out a few pre-written sentences, the content of which were hardly surprising in light of the defense strategy: Zsch\u00e4pe stated that, early on, she had shared some of the \u201cnationalist ideas\u201d espoused by B\u00f6hnhardt and his friends, but that she had turned her back on those ideas in the meantime. She \u201ccondemned\u201d what B\u00f6hnhardt and Mundlos had done to their victims and their families and also her \u201cown failings\u201d in this regard. Zsch\u00e4pe then immediately showed how little she meant all this: asked by victim\u2019s counsel Sebastian Scharmer whether she would finally answer the questions of these very same victims and their families, she again had her defense counsel answer, and Borchert again stated that the questions will not be answered.<\/p>\n
Victims\u2019 counsel again brought several motions for evidence. Inter alia, these concerned a 1997 visit of Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019s to an event of the \u201cArtgemeinschaft\u201d, a community of old and Neo-Nazis headed by Nazi lawyer J\u00fcrgen Rieger and closely based on historical national Socialism. According to the testimony of a police officer, Zsch\u00e4pe had visited this event together with other neo-Nazis from Jena \u2013 but without Uwe Mundlos and Uwe B\u00f6hnhardt.<\/p>\n
The court again rejected several earlier motions for evidence brought by victims\u2019 counsel and thus showed once more that it is not at all interested in clearing up the facts of the case. The motions rejected this time inter alia concern the \u201cFestival of Peoples\u201d, an event bringing together neo-fascists associated with \u201cBlood and Honour\u201d from all over Europe. However, the court claimed that this was not relevant at all for its judgement \u2013 after all, Wohlleben must not necessarily have fully shared the ideology of the people he had invited, and neither must his views have remained entirely stable between 1999\/2000, when he is accused of having provided the murder weapon to the NSU, and the mid-2000s, when the \u201cFestivals of Peoples\u201d took place. It is obvious that this sort of hair-splitting totally goes beyond what is required for a successful motion for evidence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Zsch\u00e4pe speaks \u2013 but does not have anything interesting to say. And: the court continues to refuse clearing up the facts. Today the court heard the answers by the Zsch\u00e4pe defense to the court\u2019s most recent questions. Again not a job well-done by defense counsel Grasel and Borchert: their answers again added events which Zsch\u00e4pe […]<\/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-1271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1271","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=1271"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1271\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1272,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1271\/revisions\/1272"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}