The Schaefer trial (deel2)

waarheidoorlog

The Schaefer trial in Munich, afternoon session, Day #1, Monday, July 2nd, 2018.

The trial resumed at 12.30 following the two hours’ interruption while the attorneys for Monika and Alfred Schaefer filed a demand that the Chairmen of the four judges, Judge Hofmann, be removed from the Process because of his evident bias towards the Defendant Alfred Schaefer.  The Chairmen ruled that the trial would continue under his authority until Wednesday, July 4th when the matter would be weighed.

The afternoon’s session commenced with the assistant of the State Prosecutor (who was not named) handed Alfred an arrest warrant that he must spend an open-ended period in police custody (not jailed as such) until the Judge decides on the case.

Monika Schaefer achieved her commonsense input when, after she persisted that she and the public gallery could not hear the proceedings, Judge Hofmann finally permitted microphones to operate.  By now the day’s session was already half over!  Alfred gave a four-hour well-documented presentation of why the Federal Republic was illegitimate.  The Judge complained at the “broader horizon” of the matters Alfred included.   His 77-page statement was shortened to 65, yet even so, observers said Alfred pulled no punches with his historical and current accusations in support of his appeal for the dismissal of the case brought against him and his sister.  At the end of this, after which the Judge had declared that Alfred must be detained for two days in police custody (as opposed to jail) because of his disdain for the authority of the Court, Sylvia Stolz exclaimed the Process was unbelievable: “This is terror”.  After all, Alfred’s disdain of the court authority was of the essence to his own defence!

When Sylvia then declined to explain to the Judge what she meant by accusing the court rulings as terror, she simply said “I am lost for words”, as were the stunned public gallery who had never before witnessed such surreal events.  By now Attorney Wolfram Nahrath had removed his robe since the Judge had ended the day’s session.  Yet the Judge insisted that Sylvia Stolz had interrupted the proceedings rather than made her outcry allowable after the afternoon session’s end.  Sylvia was then given two days in the cells for contempt of court.  Oddly, the Judge failed to offer her the usual option of a fine.  Some in the public gallery wondered that perhaps no such option was given in order to preclude Sylvia’s percipacious presence during the coming days.

The State Prosecutor refused the request from Attorney Nahrath for the Schaefer siblings to have a few moments to say goodbye.  But the Judge decided by himself to give Monika Schaefer permission to have five minutes with her brother. He instructed the court clerk to note the Protocol that first the public gallery must leave the courtroom, presumably to avoid experiencing empathetically the moving pathos they would witness that may pass between the siblings.

The trial continues at 12.30 on Tuesday 3rd July.
Michèle Renouf

vrouwjust2

Recht? Welk recht blijft er nog?

 

FROM LADY MICHELE RENOUF:  This morning, Tuesday July 3rd 2018, on day two of the Schaefer sibling’s trial, we learn that the two days’ punishment for Alfred who was taken yesterday into police custody is over already and after today’s session he will be permitted to return home. He now has this further trivial case to face later for making a Roman salute in court yesterday during the pre-trial moments when he had been given the chance to hug his handcuffed sister Monika while the Press were permitted to film.  Alfred, ever-fisty, has now been offered the option of bail of 5000 euros to secure his release, though he will have another action taken against him for this harmless historical gesture!

The trial resumed this afternoon at 12.30. Tomorrow we shall learn whether the lead Judge Hofmann will have to step down because of his evident bias towards the defendants. The disdain of this judge for withholding due microphone use so both defendants and the public gallery could hear the proceedings, and the ruling over the norm of a ready glass of water for defendants is but two of the obstructive aspects to the due basic rights which gives further surreality to the conditions under which Germans and foreigners must encounter under the Basic Laws in favour of prosecuting the expression of free opinion among citizens and right to discuss normal historical source criticism without protected exceptionalism.

Michele Renouf

Advertenties

Geef een reactie. NB De meningen verkondigd en de links die gedeeld worden in de reacties zijn de persoonlijke meningen van individuele scribenten en vertegenwoordigen niet noodzakelijkerwijs de mening van Don Quijotte.

Vul je gegevens in of klik op een icoon om in te loggen.

WordPress.com logo

Je reageert onder je WordPress.com account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Google+ photo

Je reageert onder je Google+ account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Twitter-afbeelding

Je reageert onder je Twitter account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

Facebook foto

Je reageert onder je Facebook account. Log uit /  Bijwerken )

w

Verbinden met %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.