{"id":999,"date":"2015-10-13T23:59:00","date_gmt":"2015-10-13T21:59:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/?p=999"},"modified":"2015-10-15T09:34:05","modified_gmt":"2015-10-15T07:34:05","slug":"13-10-2015","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/2015\/10\/13\/13-10-2015\/","title":{"rendered":"13.10.2015"},"content":{"rendered":"<h4>Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin Wohlleben&#8217;in avukatlar\u0131ndan yine anlams\u0131z dilek\u00e7eler<\/h4>\n<p>Bug\u00fcnk\u00fc tan\u0131kl\u0131klara Fr\u00fchlingstrasse&#8217;deki NSU evinde bulunan g\u00f6zetleme notlar\u0131na dair tan\u0131kl\u0131klarla ba\u015flanacakt\u0131. Ancak savunman\u0131n verdi\u011fi dilek\u00e7eler buna yine mani oldu:<br \/>\nDuru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fcn ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131nda mahkeme heyeti beklendi\u011fi gibi Wohlleben&#8217;in savunmas\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n durdurulmas\u0131 ve Wohlleben&#8217;iin tutukluluk haline son verilmesi i\u00e7in vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu dilek\u00e7eyi reddetti. Wohlleben&#8217;in savunmas\u0131 ilk olarak uzun bir ara verilmesini talep etti, ard\u0131ndan da karara itirazda bulundu. \u0130tirazlar\u0131nda mahkemenin olay\u0131 yeterince d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcp ta\u015f\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;ye zorunlu olarak atanan avukatlar\u0131n us\u00fcl\u00fcne uygun bir savunmada bulunamad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 defalarca belirtmi\u015f olduklar\u0131n\u0131 ifade ettiler.<\/p>\n<p>Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin savunmas\u0131 sergilenen bu piyes boyunca tamamen pasif kald\u0131lar. Geen hafta Zsch\u00e4pe ad\u0131na dilek\u00e7eye kat\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klayan avukat Grasel bile bug\u00fcn bu itiraza kat\u0131lmad\u0131 bile. <!--more--><\/p>\n<p>Wohlleben&#8217;in savunmas\u0131n\u0131n ise bu itiraz\u0131n ba\u015far\u0131ya ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi gerekiyor: Bir savunman\u0131n us\u00fcl\u00fcne uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na do\u011fal olarak avukatlar\u0131n kendi tahminlerine dayanarak de\u011fil de objektif fakt\u00f6rlere g\u00f6re karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi bir yana Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin savunmas\u0131n\u0131n birbirine d\u00fc\u015fmesi Wohlleben&#8217;e \u015fahsen bir zarar vermiyor. \u0130tiraz\u0131n sonunda da t\u00fcm bu olanlar\u0131n Wohlleben ile ilgisine dair sadece yar\u0131m yamalak iki c\u00fcmle bulunuyor.<\/p>\n<p>Mahkeme duru\u015fmaya \u00f6\u011flene do\u011fru ara verdi. Yar\u0131n muhtemelen itirazdaki arg\u00fcmanlara detayl\u0131 olarak de\u011finen bir karar ile devam edilecek.<\/p>\n<p>\u0130ki esas san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131n durumu genel olarak vahim g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyor: Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin avukatlar\u0131 Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin kendisi taraf\u0131ndan birbirine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcp fel\u00e7 ediliyor. Olaylar\u0131n akt\u00f6r\u00fc olmak yerine piyonu gibiler. Zsch\u00e4pe savunmas\u0131n\u0131 daha \u00e7ok Wohlleben&#8217;in avukatlar\u0131na b\u0131rakmak istiyor gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyor. Onlarsa mahkemenin hata yapmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in her \u015feyi deniyorlar \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc Wohlleben&#8217;in tan\u0131kl\u0131klar\u0131n sonucunda do\u011frudan h\u00fck\u00fcm giyece\u011fini biliyorlar.<\/p>\n<p>Ama mahkemenin tavr\u0131 da merak uyand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131: Daha ge\u00e7ti\u011fimiz haftan\u0131n sonunda duru\u015fman\u0131n durdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in verilen dilek\u00e7eyi bir ara vererek g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmek ve en az\u0131ndan o g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde bir tan\u0131k ifadesi almak yerine o g\u00fcnk\u00fc esas duru\u015fmay\u0131 gereksiz \u015fekilde sonland\u0131rd\u0131lar. Mahkemenin itiraza dair neden bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme aras\u0131n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan karar veremedi\u011fi bug\u00fcn de anla\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131. Bu \u015fekilde yine en az\u0131ndan iki tam g\u00fcn savunman\u0131n s\u00f6z d\u00fcellosuyla harcand\u0131. Bu durum \u00fcstelik mahkeme heyetinin tan\u0131kl\u0131klar konusunda yaz aras\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncesi ve sonras\u0131nda pek de h\u0131zl\u0131 olmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen ger\u00e7ekle\u015fiyor. Mahkeme \u00f6nceki hafta m\u00fcdahil davac\u0131lar\u0131n olaylar\u0131n ayd\u0131nlat\u0131lmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik talepleriyle art\u0131k ilgilenmedi\u011fini belli etti (bkz. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/2015\/09\/29\/29-09-2015\/\" target=\"_blank\">29.09.2015<\/a> ve <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/2015\/09\/30\/30-09-2015\/\" target=\"_blank\">30.09.2015<\/a> tarihli bloglar). Ama dava s\u00fcrecini h\u0131zland\u0131rmaya y\u00f6nelik \u00f6zel bir \u00e7abas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6rmek de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fil.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Zsch\u00e4pe&#8217;nin Wohlleben&#8217;in avukatlar\u0131ndan yine anlams\u0131z dilek\u00e7eler Bug\u00fcnk\u00fc tan\u0131kl\u0131klara Fr\u00fchlingstrasse&#8217;deki NSU evinde bulunan g\u00f6zetleme notlar\u0131na dair tan\u0131kl\u0131klarla ba\u015flanacakt\u0131. Ancak savunman\u0131n verdi\u011fi dilek\u00e7eler buna yine mani oldu: Duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fcn ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131nda mahkeme heyeti beklendi\u011fi gibi Wohlleben&#8217;in savunmas\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n durdurulmas\u0131 ve Wohlleben&#8217;iin tutukluluk haline son verilmesi i\u00e7in vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu dilek\u00e7eyi reddetti. Wohlleben&#8217;in savunmas\u0131 ilk olarak uzun bir ara verilmesini [&hellip;]<\/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-999","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/999","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=999"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/999\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1000,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/999\/revisions\/1000"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=999"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=999"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nsu-nebenklage.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=999"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}