The political persecution

14. The weapons proceedings

A. The REvocation of the Gun Permit

Beo is a Senior Forestry Inspector out of service, as mentioned earlier, due to a work-related disability. As senior forestry inspector at the Bavarian State Forestry Administration, he was also a civil servant professional hunter and in this function had to own the necessary hunting weapons. He therefore has the lifelong right to hunt in all Bavarian State Forest Administrations and legally acquired and owned the necessary hunting weapons after registration of the purchase, i.e. before the purchase, for 30 years.


The District Office of Coburg withdrew his weapon possession permit due to the alleged existence of the judgement for alleged fraud of March 30, 2006 Case No.3 Ds 106 Js 7394/04. A deadline of 30 days was set for the handing over of the weapons. In his case, however, the withdrawal of the weapons is tantamount to an occupational ban. As he had neither received this judgment nor a copy of it, he appealed against the withdrawal and requested this judgment or a properly authenticated copy.


Mrs Jacob was the clerk in the case of the weapons withdrawal at the District Office. She is related to the Schneider brothers (Jacob's plywood factory), who cheated him out of the right to sewerage acquired by notarial deed of sale by filing a complaint of trespass (see Ch. 10). This had resulted in an order of summary punishment against Beo.


The appeal was not dealt with by Mrs Jacob, and no judgment or copy of the judgment was presented (refusal to hear the case).


Beo had lodged an extra-unspecific appeal to leave it open to the authorities whether the Administrative Court would rule on the matter.


Instead, the doorbell on Beo's front door rang 10 days after the appeal was lodged, without waiting for the 30-day period to expire. His wife Katja opened the door and found a six-man police unit heavily armed with machine guns, body armour and helmets, or should we say "terrorist unit". They even had a pile driver with them if the door was not opened voluntarily. Katja shouted extremely dryly and with her very own emphatically sour and at the same time completely calm manner: "Beo, the police is here! - and thus rather let " these assholes are here" hang out.


Who of them did not know that the gun law for service weapons is not applicable at all? They were all officers who were using them at this moment.

Beo came to the door. "Mr. von Prince, where are the weapons?"

And he said, "I don't know."

"If you don't hand them over, we're gonna turn this place upside down!" was the harsh response.

"Well, in that case, you'll just have to come with me."


The weapons were in the bedroom in the bed under the mattress.


The chief of operations wrote the seizure report while Beo stood beside it. Suddenly, a policeman nervously shouted behind him, "Take your hands out of your pockets," with the gun pointed at his back. It was an extremely tense situation, apparently they had expected considerable resistance.


When the protocol was ready, Beo remarked: "Well, at least it got signed."


When saying goodbye, the head of operations, Arpad von Schalscha-Ehrenfeld, bowed extremely low before him, showing that the police were well aware that this was an illegal operation.


But what do you want to do with officers who follow every illegal order? Isn't that called cadaver obedience? We've seen that before in Coburg.


After the withdrawal of his weapons, the District Office reported him for illegal possession of weapons according to the weapons law, which, as already mentioned, does not apply here. The allegedly illegal weapons consisted only of the possession of weapons absolutely necessary for the exercise of the profession. These hunting weapons had been officially registered for 30 years. No illegal possession of weapons can arise from this, even if the weapon possession permit is withdrawn. An offence is merely an administrative offence, which would be subject to a fine.


A withdrawal of the gun ownership permit for a professional hunter would first have to be preceded by a corresponding criminal conviction. This does not exist. To make a criminal offence out of it is therefore perversion of justice.


In order to check whether the District Office has at least a legally valid judgment with a signature of the judge in the fraud case, or at least a certification that is correct according to the law, Beo went with a witness to inspect the files. In fact, no such judgment or copy was available. Nevertheless, the main hearing in the weapons case has now been scheduled.


B. A trial for alleged illegal possession of firearms

Case No. 118 Js 181/08 on Oct. 02, 2008 at the Coburg District Court


Judge: W. Bauer

Public Prosecutor: Raffaele Trotta

Clerk: Court Clerk Geier


The first instance was again heard by Judge Bauer with the Court Clerk Geier. In the corridor leading to the smaller courtrooms on the lower floor of the Coburg court building, a transverse barrier with a metal detector was installed especially for this trial, as at the airport. Behind it were numerous prison officers equipped with bulletproof vests and weapons. And in front of it, in the wide corridor, a whole lot of people had gathered, all of whom wanted to attend the trial and couldn't get any further because of the barrier. Nobody wanted to get through the metal detector barriers and resentment spread. There was a real commotion. There were loud discussions with the judicial officers. Fragments of words flew through the air, as if this was even allowed by law - it would probably have nothing to do with a public hearing, etc. Some of them tried to take pictures of this unique situation with their mobile phones or to make short films.


Beo pushed himself forward and asked the judicial officials, "Why should we go through it?"

"Yes, they have to come through here," one of them replied.

 "What's the point of all these controls?" Beo asked further.

"Yes, we are collecting all cell phones and recording devices," the answer came.

"And where is the presumption of innocence? Why do I have to go through here? I don't do that here. You must first prove your identity! I don't take orders from anonymous sources."


Then he was grabbed by the judicial officers and forcibly dragged through the metal detector. The crowd became loud and the shoving became even more violent. Several judicial officers now positioned themselves broad-legged at the barricade on the side of the trial observers. Beo, on the other side of the barrier, had to take off his shoes and was placed in the metal detector. When the procedure was over, the spectators followed while Beo put on his shoes. He continued to argue with the judicial officials:


"Why is it so dangerous to take records? Why is the entire state power being called upon to prevent a tape recording?"

"It was ordered," came back dry from the correctional officers.

And Beo said..: "Because they've falsified the records, you are standing here... "The entire state power is being used to falsify records."


One by one, all the trial monitors were searched, just like at a trial against the mafia. Karin asked for a receipt when her MP3 player was confiscated in order to get proof. In our book, Do Your Duty, we published this receipt.


Even before all the trial observers were searched, Judge Bauer began the trial.


The assigned attorney took the sheets from the investigation documents, which indicated the Judge's identity. At the main trial, both the Judge and the Public Prosecutor refused to give their names.


Although according to the Weapons Act there is only one misdemeanour for which a fine could be imposed in the maximum case, it is made into a criminal case, which ended with a sentence of 10 months without probation.


After the trial, some of the audience went with Beo and Karin to a Chinese restaurant on the Anger Place. There they discussed this judicial arbitrariness out loud with indignation. As neither the Judge nor the Public Prosecutor identified themselves, this was not a judge, but an inadmissible exceptional court. Judges are now practically the spectators or trial observers as lay judges. There were discussions about how the verdict should be passed as a public hearing and on behalf of the Administrative Community of the Free City of Danzig, which we had founded in the meantime. The Lay Judges decided that under no circumstances can a criminal charge be sustained. A protocol was written and signed by the 15 Lay Judges.


Later we published this judgement together with the copy of the tape transcript of the fraud trial on March 30, 2006 from justifying state of emergency on the internet page, because until today (state 2020) all these injuries are not healed despite constant reminders.


©2020 by Beowulf von Prince, Karin Leffer