[ad_1]
Tomorrow, in the NSU trial, one last time, all eyes will be on Beate Zschpe – and presiding judge Manfred Gtzl. After more than five years, after more than 430 days of trial, hundreds of witnesses, some endless legal wrangling, after days of tears in the courtroom and victim's statements, the Munich Regional Court will issue its verdict.
under the treatment of a series of almost racist murders and attacks that rocked the republic, according to the indictment of a neo-Nazi cell living in the basement since many years: Uwe Mundlos, Uwe Bhnhardt and Beate Zschpe
of the National Socialist Underground. She is the main defendant in this gigantic process, which will remain in German history books, even alone as one of the most complex evidence processes of recent decades. Their two friends died and committed suicide on November 4, 2011 after a failed bank robbery.
The question of all the questions before Day X is now: Is Zschpe sentenced to mid-term for the ten murders and attacks? the federal prosecutor demands? So, as if she had herself supported the removal of the pistol "Ceska", with which the NSU went through the republic, the women took the husband, the children the father, the parents the son? The punishment for this would probably be life imprisonment, possibly with subsequent preventive detention.
Underground life
Or was Zschpe acquitted of the accusation of being the intermediary, perhaps also of the less serious allegation of complicity? Then she could only be found guilty of the acts that she admitted in her written submissions. She said that she knew and bankrupted the bankruptcies of her friends, and so the trio financed life in the country. ;underground. And: On November 4, 2011, after discovering the death of her friends, she set fire to the last escape home of the NSU – and that's what she confessed.
<img src = "http://static1.fnp.de/storage/image/0/8/1/7/2207180_cms2image-fixedwidth-185x0_1rh0aO_USq9ox.jpg" width = "185" height = "235" alt = " " /> Image Zoom
His two trusted lawyers therefore require a prison term of less than ten years. Their initial advocates want an immediate release because the planned sentence of more than six years of detention has already been set.
In fact, there is no evidence so far that Zschpe was on one of the crime scenes. But how could she be condemned as murderous, as the prosecution asks?
Federal prosecutor Herbert Diemer has already explained in plenary session in the autumn: "She knew everything, supported everything and co-directed and cooperated in her own way".
"No Terrorist"
Zschpe's defender, Wolfgang Heer, stressed: "Ms. Zschpe is not a terrorist, she is not a murderer and an badbadin." His trusted lawyer Mathias Grasel warned that he should not follow the motto "Dogs act." And Zschpe himself said in his last words: "Please, do not condemn me for any something that I did not want or do. "
In fact, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has removed the obstacles Gosslich has cited Zschpe's defense lawyer several decisions of BGH , who have been sentenced for co-sponsorship in other cases.In one of them, it is said: If Mitternschaft exists, the court must consider "because of". a global consideration of judgment. "And further:" Critical criteria are the degree of your own interest in the act, the extent of involvement and tyranny or at least the will of, so that the execution and the result of the act also depend on the will of the person concerned.
Gtzl and his colleagues have known for a long time mps the jurisprudence of the BGH. Especially since it was often the third BGH Senate that decided on the revision of the NSU.
With the four co-defendants, the requirements of the indictment and the defense attorney are as far apart as possible. For example, the federal prosecutor wants to imprison Ralf Wohlleben for 12 years in prison, just like André because he rented a motorhome with Mundlos and Bhnhardt on one of the crime scenes. The respective defenders, on the other hand, demanded acquittal – because the evidence of a conviction was inadequate.
The pressure of waiting on the Munich court is enormous. The maximum charge of the federal prosecutor's office is once in the room. This is where the pressure of many referees for the toughest punishment possible. And the expectation of a wide audience that the actions of the NSU should be punished as legally as possible.
But it is not so easy. It is not for nothing that the process took more than five years and more than 430 days of negotiations. It is not for nothing that the court heard hundreds of witnesses, followed the individual clues with a somewhat extreme meticulousness, and gradually collected them as smaller pieces of mosaic. Does this lead to the conclusion that Gtzl – known in the past for severe judgments – at the end this time, very justifiably justified, wants to pronounce a severe verdict?
Strictly speaking, it is in a criminal case, to say the things or the innocence of the accused. From Behrden's years of mbadive failure to unravel, as it was evident after the NSU and the Republic, it consisted mainly of parliamentary committees, as there were already several in federal countries and some exist again. But in the case of the NSU, one can not always be separated from the other
Many Inconsistencies
Many inconsistencies were also raised: for example, the still dubious role of a constitutional scholar installed in Kbadel in the room next to a cybercafe when Bhnhardt and Mundlos fired at the young operator behind the counter. And among the issues that have remained unresolved to date, these include: Is the NSU really only three people? Were there still many supporters on the right-wing extremist scene who are still unknown today?
In fact, the trio had many sympathizers. And where some of the defendants remain political until today, this process has left little doubt. "Our client is a National Socialist, who stands with his skin and hair to his political belief," said, for example, a defender of Andre E. And still sitting on the spectators of well-known men with E. or Wohlleben and clearly attributable to the scene.
Elif Kubasik, the wife of kiosk operator Mehmet Kubasik, who was murdered by the NSU, drew a dark conclusion in his pledoy. "Here in the process, my questions have not been answered," she said bitterly. She and other relatives, including Yvonne Boulgarides, have finally raised mbadive allegations against the authorities: no permission to expel intelligence agents, loss of memory even among Behrden's witnesses, shredded files, not a single responsible official
But even if many questions remain unanswered: the legal treatment in the first instance of the NSU acts ends now. But how? Even in the circles of the federal prosecutor's office must be heard: We do not know if our indictment comes through. And if: Then the verdict is likely to land for the revision at the federal court in Karlsruhe.
dfg f dgh tg
Source link
