{"id":366,"date":"2014-01-14T21:59:34","date_gmt":"2014-01-14T19:59:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/?p=366"},"modified":"2014-04-18T13:00:20","modified_gmt":"2014-04-18T11:00:20","slug":"14-01-2014","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/2014\/01\/14\/14-01-2014\/","title":{"rendered":"14.01.2014"},"content":{"rendered":"<h4><span style=\"line-height: 1.714285714; font-size: 1rem;\">Federal Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k ayd\u0131nlatma s\u00fcrecinin \u00f6n\u00fcne engeller koyuyor<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>Bug\u00fcnk\u00fc duru\u015fmaya,m\u00fcdahil avukatlar, federal savc\u0131l\u0131k ve de Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019nin avukatlar\u0131 ile aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en tart\u0131\u015fmalar damgas\u0131n\u0131 vurdu.Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, tan\u0131klar\u0131n sorgulanmas\u0131yla birlikte yeni bir bilgiye ula\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131.<\/p>\n<p>\u0130lk tart\u0131\u015fmaya, m\u00fcdahil davac\u0131lar\u0131n -Polonya\u2019da tutuklu olan bir ki\u015finin tan\u0131k olarak dinlenmesi talebiyle- mahkemeye sundu\u011fu 08.01.2014 tarihli dilek\u00e7esi neden oldu. S\u00f6z konusu tan\u0131k, 2004 y\u0131l\u0131nda san\u0131k Ralf Wohlleben\u2019e VW transporterlerinin immobilizer sistemlerinin devre d\u0131\u015f\u0131 b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in bir aleti temin etmi\u015f ve kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bir tabanca teslim alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131.\u015eimdiye kadar Wohlleben sadece cinayet silah\u0131 olan Ceska\u2019n\u0131n temini (1999\/2000) ile su\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in, bu durum Wohlleben\u2019in rol\u00fcne dair yeni bir tablo ortaya \u00e7\u0131karabilirdi.<\/p>\n<p>Ba\u015fsavc\u0131, dilek\u00e7enin \u015feklen ge\u00e7ersiz ve i\u00e7erik olarak anlams\u0131z olmas\u0131 nedeniyle reddini talepetti.Bununla belli ki,NSU \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn sadece \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015fiden olu\u015ftu\u011fu \u015feklinde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan tabloyu,her bir yeni bulgu kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131ndane pahas\u0131na olursa olsun savunmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131. San\u0131k Wohlleben\u2019in 2004\u2019teara\u00e7lar\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131nmas\u0131 i\u00e7in bir alet ele ge\u00e7irmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131ve bunun NSU taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenli olarak sald\u0131r\u0131lar\u0131 i\u00e7in kullan\u0131lmas\u0131, O\u2019nun grup i\u00e7ine farz edilenden \u00e7ok daha derinlerde dahil oldu\u011fu sonucunu verir. Ancak, Federal Savc\u0131l\u0131k soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 devrald\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bu yana, her durumda NSU \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olanlar\u0131n say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funca d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck tutmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131yor. Geleneksel tek fail tezinden de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde vazge\u00e7miyor.M\u00fcdahil avukatlar\u0131n sundu\u011fu bu dilek\u00e7e \u00fczerine verilen karar,G\u00f6tzl\u2019\u00fcn ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131ndaki mahkeme heyetinin almas\u0131 gereken ve G\u00f6tzl\u2019\u00fcn cinayetlerin ger\u00e7ektenayd\u0131nlat\u0131lmas\u0131 ve su\u00e7lular\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131yla m\u0131 ilgilendi\u011fi, yoksa sadece davay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fctmek mi istedi\u011fiy\u00f6n\u00fcnde politik bir karard\u0131r.<\/p>\n<p>\u0130kinci tart\u0131\u015fma,tan\u0131k Alexander Scheidemantel\u2019in ifadesine y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahil avukatlar\u0131n bir\u00e7o\u011funun yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131a\u00e7\u0131klamanedeniyle \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131. S\u00f6z konusu tan\u0131k, e\u015finin sa\u011fl\u0131k kart\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k Gerlach\u2019a verildi\u011fine dair08.01.2014 tarihinde ifade vermi\u015fti. M\u00fcdahil avukatlar\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131nda hem Scheidemantel \u00e7iftinin hem de san\u0131k Gerlach\u2019\u0131n yalan s\u00f6ylemek i\u00e7in bir nedeninin oldu\u011fu detayl\u0131 olarak sunuldu.\u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc, Alexander Scheidemantel ve belki de kar\u0131s\u0131 kart\u0131n kimin i\u00e7in kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kesin olarak biliyordu. Gerlach,arkada\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 korumak i\u00e7in bu \u015fekilde yalan s\u00f6yledi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde, bu yalanlardan bir sonuca var\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131, verdi\u011fi di\u011fer bilgilerin de do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar.<\/p>\n<p>Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalara, Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019nin avukatlar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kusurlu bulundu\u011fu i\u00e7in itiraz edildi ve b\u00f6ylece a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kesintiye u\u011fram\u0131\u015f oldu. Bu ifadeler, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesine y\u00f6nelik bir a\u00e7\u0131klama i\u00e7in \u00e7ok geni\u015fti. Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019nin avukatlar\u0131 daha ge\u00e7en hafta Gerlach\u2019\u0131n t\u00fcm a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n \u2013malum oldu\u011fu \u00fczere Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019ye y\u00fcklenen- inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 ve ispatlanabilir olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc O\u2019nun sa\u011fl\u0131k kart\u0131n\u0131n verilmesine y\u00f6nelik ger\u00e7ekleri s\u00f6ylemedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015flerdi. Art\u0131k onlar\u0131n delil sunmas\u0131durumu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131. Mahkemenin, m\u00fcdahil avukatlar\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131n\u0131n uygun oldu\u011funa karar vermesinden sonra, bu a\u00e7\u0131klama kesintiye u\u011framadan sonuna kadar tamamlanabildi.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Federal Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k ayd\u0131nlatma s\u00fcrecinin \u00f6n\u00fcne engeller koyuyor Bug\u00fcnk\u00fc duru\u015fmaya,m\u00fcdahil avukatlar, federal savc\u0131l\u0131k ve de Zsch\u00e4pe\u2019nin avukatlar\u0131 ile aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en tart\u0131\u015fmalar damgas\u0131n\u0131 vurdu.Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, tan\u0131klar\u0131n sorgulanmas\u0131yla birlikte yeni bir bilgiye ula\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131. \u0130lk tart\u0131\u015fmaya, m\u00fcdahil davac\u0131lar\u0131n -Polonya\u2019da tutuklu olan bir ki\u015finin tan\u0131k olarak dinlenmesi talebiyle- mahkemeye sundu\u011fu 08.01.2014 tarihli dilek\u00e7esi neden oldu. S\u00f6z konusu tan\u0131k, 2004 y\u0131l\u0131nda [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-366","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/366","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=366"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/366\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=366"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=366"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}