{"id":1440,"date":"2017-11-16T23:59:03","date_gmt":"2017-11-16T22:59:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/?p=1440"},"modified":"2017-11-19T19:40:06","modified_gmt":"2017-11-19T18:40:06","slug":"16-11-2017","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/2017\/11\/16\/16-11-2017\/","title":{"rendered":"16.11.2017"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201eBu sesi susturamayacaks\u0131nuz\u201c – Zsch\u00e4pe’nin savunmas\u0131n\u0131n dayanaks\u0131z itirazlar\u0131 ba\u015fa\u0131ya ula\u015famad\u0131.<\/h4>\n

Zsch\u00e4pe’nin eski avukatlar\u0131 Sturm, Stahl ve Heer bug\u00fcn d\u00fcn ba\u015flad\u0131klar\u0131 sabotaj takti\u011fini s\u00fcrd\u00fcrseler de yeniden ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131zl\u0131\u011fa u\u011frad\u0131lar. Israrc\u0131 engel \u00e7abalar\u0131 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta, \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fclen \u0130smail Ya\u015far ve Abdurrahim \u00d6z\u00fcdo\u011fru’nun yak\u0131nlar\u0131n\u0131 temsil eden m\u00fcdahil avukat Dr. Mehmet Daimag\u00fcler’in m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131n saatlerce gecikmesine yol a\u00e7t\u0131. Ancak mahkemenin vardi\u011fi bir karar\u0131n ard\u0131ndan Daimag\u00fcler ak\u015fam\u00fcst\u00fcn\u00fcn erken saatlerinde m\u00fctalaas\u0131na b\u00fcy\u00fck oranda rahats\u0131z edilmeden devam edebildi.<\/p>\n

Sturm, Stahl ve Heer’e g\u00f6re m\u00fctalaa \u201ek\u0131smen me\u015fru olsa da bu mahkeme salonunda yeri olmayan politik bir konu\u015fma\u201cyd\u0131. Irk\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k, yap\u0131sal \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131\u0131k, soru\u015fturma makamlar\u0131na ele\u015ftiri konular\u0131n\u0131n \u201eyersiz\u201c oldu\u011funu ve m\u00fctalaalarda bunlardan bahsedilmemesi gerekti\u011fini \u00f6ne s\u00fcrecek kadar ileri gittiler. Sadece \u00e7ok say\u0131da m\u00fcdahil avukat de\u011fil, Federal Savc\u0131l\u0131k ve hatta san\u0131k Schultze’nin savunmas\u0131 da a\u00e7\u0131k ve net \u015fekilde Zsch\u00e4pe’nin avukatlar\u0131n\u0131n engelleme \u00e7abalar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f bildirdiler. Zsch\u00e4pe’nin kendisi ve avukat\u0131 Grasel t\u00fcm g\u00fcn\u00fc susarak ge\u00e7irdiler.<\/p>\n

Mahkeme itiraz\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde reddetti: \u201e\u00d6n\u00fcm\u00fczdeki vakada avukat Dr. Daimag\u00fcler\u00a0 iddianamedeki dava konusu su\u00e7lar\u0131n kendisine g\u00f6re hangi sebepler y\u00fcz\u00fcnden ancak 2011 y\u0131l\u0131ndan itibaren a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmaya ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yor. Bu konu kompleksi cezan\u0131n takdirini dolayl\u0131 olarak etkileyebilir ve konu\u015fmac\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne g\u00f6re duru\u015fmada yeterince i\u015flenmeyen delillere dayan\u0131yor.\u201c Mahkeme, bir m\u00fctalaan\u0131n sadece ba\u011flam\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde sunulabildi\u011finde etkili olabilece\u011fine ve bu nedenle itiraz i\u00e7in ger\u00e7ekten bir neden yoksa ara verilmemesi gerekti\u011fine de i\u015faret etti.<\/p>\n

Bu noktada Heer ve Stahl’\u0131n m\u00fcdahil avukat\u0131n m\u00fctalaas\u0131na nerelerde bu denli \u015fiddetli ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz bir \u015fekilde tepki verdikleri anlaml\u0131: Daimag\u00fcler tam \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n konu edilmesinin \u00e7o\u011funlukla savunma tepkilerine\u00a0 neden oldu\u011funu, \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n de\u011fil de onun konu edilmesinin, \u00f6zellikle de bunu yapanlar \u201eAlman\u201c olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen ki\u015filer oldu\u011funda provokasyon olarak alg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 anlat\u0131yordu. Heer ve Stahl’\u0131n tam da o noktada bunun mahkeme salonunda yeri olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 arg\u00fcman\u0131yla s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc kesmesi ve ayr\u0131ca bir provokasyon oldu\u011funu iddia etmeleri tabii ki Daimag\u00fcler’in a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131yla do\u011fru noktaya temas etti\u011finin kan\u0131t\u0131.<\/p>\n

M\u00fcdahil avukat\u0131n, burada m\u00fcvekkillerin bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 aktard\u0131\u011f\u0131na i\u015faret etmesi \u00fczerine Heer, Daimag\u00fcler’in o halde g\u00f6revini anlamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu g\u00f6revin bu bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n davaya filtresiz bir \u015fekilde girmemesini sa\u011flamak oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yledi. Di\u011fer s\u00f6zlerle: Heer’e g\u00f6re bir avukat\u0131n g\u00f6revi, m\u00fcvekkilerinin \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 temil etmek de\u011fil, onlar\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc mahkemede neyin \u201eyerli\u201c neyin yersiz oldu\u011funa dair beklentilerine uyacak \u015fekilde \u201efiltrelemek\u201c. Daimag\u00fcler bu beklentileri do\u011fal olarak a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde reddetti: \u201eBurada sundu\u011fum, NSU’nun i\u015fledi\u011fi su\u00e7lar\u0131n ard\u0131ndan hayatta kalanlar\u0131n, m\u00fcvekkillerimin filtresiz g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc. Bu sesi susturamayacaks\u0131n\u0131z.\u201c<\/p>\n

Mahkemenin bunun ard\u0131ndan gelen karar\u0131, ger\u00e7ekten de avukatlar\u0131n m\u00fctalaan\u0131n devam\u0131n\u0131 b\u00fcy\u00fck oranda araya girmeden dinlemelerini sa\u011flad\u0131. Daimag\u00fcler bunun ard\u0131ndan \u00f6zellikle polisteki kurumsl \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k problemiyle ve Federal Savc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n kapsam\u0131 fazla dar olan iddianamesiyle ilgili a\u00e7\u0131klamalarda bulundu. Kendisinin konu etti\u011fi i\u00e7eriklere dair \u00e7ok iyi bir \u00f6zeti yak\u0131nda NSU watch<\/a>‘\u0131n g\u00fcnl\u00fck duru\u015fma \u00f6zetinde bulabilirsiniz.<\/p>\n

Avukatlar\u0131n \u0131srarc\u0131 \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015flar\u0131 b\u00f6ylelikle sona erdi mi yoksa di\u011fer m\u00fctalaalarda da devam edecek mi g\u00f6rece\u011fiz. Verilen bu aralar\u0131n bir savunma y\u00f6ntemi olarak ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir anlam\u0131 olamaz \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc mahkemenin dava taraflar\u0131n\u0131n fazla \u201eayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131\u201c m\u00fctalaada bulunmas\u0131na izin verdi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle edilen bir temyizin ba\u015far\u0131ya ula\u015fmas\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclemez. Ve Zsch\u00e4pe’nin avukatlar\u0131 da ciddi bir \u015fekilde itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015far\u0131ya ula\u015fabilece\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyor olamazlar. Sadece m\u00fcdahil davac\u0131lar de\u011fil -Daimag\u00fcler’in sert \u015fekilde sald\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131- Federal Savc\u0131l\u0131k ve mahkeme de, ge\u00e7erli d\u00fczenlemelere g\u00f6re m\u00fctalaalara m\u00fcdahale edilmesine neden sadece \u00e7ok k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 bir kapsamda izin verildi\u011fini ve bu vakada bu gerek\u00e7elerin yak\u0131n\u0131ndan bile ge\u00e7ilmedi\u011fini fazla net bir \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131lar. B\u00f6ylelikle savunman\u0131n haz\u0131rlanmas\u0131 ve sunulmas\u0131 bir kez daha duru\u015fman\u0131n saatlerine mal olan bu son itiraz\u0131 da b\u00fcy\u00fck oranda daha \u00f6nce bir\u00e7ok kez \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yanl\u0131\u015f arg\u00fcmanlar\u0131n isteksiz bir tekrar\u0131 olmaktan \u00f6teye gidemedi.<\/p>\n

Avukatlar\u0131n davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 b\u00f6ylelikle hm kendilerini hem de bu davada m\u00fcvekkillerini ger\u00e7ekten savunmak amacyla hareket etmedeki beceriksizliklerini a\u00e7\u0131\u011fa \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc Sturm, Stahl ve Heer’in davadaki tav\u0131rlar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcnen o ki davaya y\u00f6nelik bir strateji taraf\u0131ndan belirlenmektense kendi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerine uygun nitelikte. \u00dc\u00e7l\u00fc devlet kurumlar\u0131na, \u00f6zellikle de polis, Anayasay\u0131 Koruma Dairesi, Federal Savc\u0131l\u0131k ve mahkemeye esasl\u0131 bir ele\u015ftiride bulunulmas\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekten de tamamen yasak ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclemez oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyor gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyor. Bu daha \u00e7ok Heinrich Mann’\u0131n \u201eder Untertan\u201c (tebaa) kitab\u0131ndaki devlet-birey ili\u015fkilerine y\u00f6nelik anlay\u0131\u015fa uygun d\u00fc\u015fse de mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda duran \u00fc\u00e7l\u00fcn\u00fcn otoriteye tabi ve s\u00fcrekli anlay\u0131\u015fs\u0131z davranmalar\u0131na neden olan tav\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 da a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yor.<\/p>\n

E\u011fer bu \u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc devlet kurumlar\u0131n\u0131n iddianamedeki su\u00e7 eylemlerinde sorumluluklar\u0131 oldu\u011funu ve olaylar\u0131n ayd\u0131nlat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 ele\u015ftirilebilir \u015fekilde imkans\u0131z k\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 tasavvur edilemez olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcyorsa ve bu anlay\u0131\u015f nedeniyle m\u00fcvekilleri i\u00e7in b\u00f6ylesi bir arg\u00fcman i\u00e7eren hi\u00e7bir savunma takti\u011fini g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulunduram\u0131yor ya da uygulayam\u0131yorsa bu, Zsch\u00e4pe i\u00e7in ba\u015far\u0131yla sonu\u00e7lanabilecek kimi savunma stratejilerinin ba\u015f\u0131ndan bu yana ihtimal d\u0131\u015f\u0131 b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na geliyor. Bu da m\u00fcvekkilleriyle aralar\u0131ndaki anla\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6nemli bir temeli olabilir.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201eBu sesi susturamayacaks\u0131nuz\u201c – Zsch\u00e4pe’nin savunmas\u0131n\u0131n dayanaks\u0131z itirazlar\u0131 ba\u015fa\u0131ya ula\u015famad\u0131. Zsch\u00e4pe’nin eski avukatlar\u0131 Sturm, Stahl ve Heer bug\u00fcn d\u00fcn ba\u015flad\u0131klar\u0131 sabotaj takti\u011fini s\u00fcrd\u00fcrseler de yeniden ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131zl\u0131\u011fa u\u011frad\u0131lar. Israrc\u0131 engel \u00e7abalar\u0131 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta, \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fclen \u0130smail Ya\u015far ve Abdurrahim \u00d6z\u00fcdo\u011fru’nun yak\u0131nlar\u0131n\u0131 temsil eden m\u00fcdahil avukat Dr. Mehmet Daimag\u00fcler’in m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131n saatlerce gecikmesine yol a\u00e7t\u0131. Ancak mahkemenin vardi\u011fi bir karar\u0131n […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"yes","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1440","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1440","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1440"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1440\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1441,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1440\/revisions\/1441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1440"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1440"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1440"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}