In 2004, Karin's husband was innocently prosecuted and a year later he was tried and convicted. They objected, of course, and wanted an appeal. In return, the lawyer persuaded them to sign a contract in which he set a fixed price for the grounds of appeal and the possible appeal hearing. Today they know that they never had a chance to appeal and the lawyer collected 6.500, - € + VAT for this one letter. Not only that: he concealed from those who were completely inexperienced with the legal system that they had the right to a compulsory lawyer. In total, the lawyer's fees amounted to about 56.000, - €. Even if they would have had to pay these costs after the conviction anyway, it would have been an enormous relief if they had had a compulsory lawyer during the negotiation period. Because the savings bank had used itself immediately the situation and had quit the loans, in order to knock out afterwards higher interest. This was followed by at least 2 years of financial crisis management, during which the question of how to proceed economically was on the table every day.
At that time, they had no doubt that they would be right in the appeal, because in the judgment, witness statements had been twisted by 180°. This had to be verifiable on the basis of the court record. But when the young, employed lawyer showed what such a protocol of the regional court looked like and that not a single witness statement was recorded there, Karin was stunned. It was clear to her at that moment that she did not live in a constitutional state. But what was it then? She only gradually noticed the many inconsistencies: Why had the Presiding judge Amend shouted in the courtroom on the very first day of the trial, even before it really got going, and accused the accused right away? This was already a prejudgement and the attorneys present should have intervened immediately with a bias motion. But nobody did anything, nobody opened their mouths. Motions for evidence, which her husband brought forward, were put aside with a tired smile. The verdict was already established in advance.
At that time, in August 2006, Karin thought the laws had shortcomings and wrote a letter to the editor, unaware that she was setting an avalanche in motion that is still rolling today. Beo called her, explaining that in his case, the minutes had also been falsified. There were more calls and even letters from the prisons - all calls for justice.
They decided to meet, at least those who were at liberty. Meeting place: The beer garden of the Schützenhaus. Irony of fate: the owner of the Schützenhaus was to become a cellmate of Beo in Kronach Prison for months in 2013 and was innocently convicted of murdering his wife during this time. It was actually a terrible accident in which he stumbled over his dog with a rifle in his hand with which he was hunting rats in the basement (there was a fish pond next to the Schützenhaus) and the rifle went off and the shot hit his wife, who was killed instantly. He then tried to kill himself and survived, badly injured, lying in hospital for months, the bullets had split several ribs and penetrated into his abdomen, and Beo had to pull several strings while still in prison. Of the 60 witnesses the prosecution had called, not one testified against him. To support the verdict, the main exonerating witness was tried for false testimony after the verdict. Under pressure and in the hope of somehow getting off, she recanted her testimony. And as it is when you think you can somehow escape this criminal justice, she was sentenced to prison. Her inn went bankrupt. Again this trial was at an old acquaintance's place: Judge Bauer.
Karin was accompanied to this meeting by her husband. They entered the beer garden from the parking lot behind the Schützenhaus. It did not take long before they found Beo sitting alone at a table. No sooner had they arrived than more justice victims joined them. Among them was another couple, a musician from the Landestheater, who had lost his job through a false accusation and had had several witnesses for his innocence, and a man who had collided with a bus on his bicycle.
Everyone told one horror story after another.
From that time on in August 2006 we met regularly once a week in the evening and tried to find out what was going on in this country, how these falsified minutes came about. In the beginning we always met in the restaurant Lorelei. From time to time others joined us who were looking for help and who had also made their experiences with the German justice system. Still others stayed away, who felt a danger if they were to fight against the arbitrariness. They felt threatened and their lives were no longer safe. There were also those who had actually already experienced life-threatening assaults and who lacked the courage to continue. They had literally already felt their hands in a stranglehold on their neck.
Of course, as trial observers, we attended the trials of various victims.
Manfred came one day and brought a UV lamp with him. We used it to inspect the identity cards carefully. Karin discovered during these observations in the surface embossing that the federal eagles, which stuck their heads and tails together in all four directions, gave the shape of swastikas. What kind of forces were at work here? And what did they want to express?
The evenings were regularly very long until well after midnight due to the tireless discussions. It was clear that there was a great need for discussion because of the many events that were constantly rushing at us. Since the owner of the Lorelei didn't want to leave it open that long, we moved to Rio Brasil in the Theatergasse after a few months.
At the end of 2006 we got hold of a leaflet from a man from Saarland who had fled to France to escape the German arbitrary justice system. He complained that the judges' signatures on the sentences were missing. Beo began to look into this and looked for the relevant laws. We were astonished to find out that he was right. Also, the authentications on the sentences were pure window dressing and only available to deceive. The certifications should have confirmed that the signature was on the original, which was never done. Thus, these certifications only confirmed that the signature on the original was not present.
And not only that. According to the law, everyone had the right to an original judgment and not just a so-called copy. According to the text of the law, a copy was only issued upon request, if the judgement was needed, for example, for an authority to pass on. Every accused and defendant always had the right to an original judgement. This is quite logical and could not be otherwise.
Because of all these grievances, we founded the Association Bund für das Recht (Federation for the Law) at the beginning of 2007.
The restaurant Rio Brasil was closed on May 1, 2007, so that we now met in Sonneberg at Manfred's place, who always had the longest journey until then. So we sat in the living room at a big table and his partner Marie spoiled us every time with a plate of sandwiches. But in autumn it became too cool in his living room, which was stuffed with all kinds of articles from his sales, so that the big tiled stove could not be heated.
So we moved again and met now in the kitchen of Karin's practice. In the meantime, Beo came with the information that the roster allocation court business of the courts were neither in accordance with the law § 16 GVG, nor were they prepared in accordance with article 101 Basic Law. Therefore, at the Coburg District Court and the Coburg Regional Court, as well as at the Bamberg Higher Regional Court and the German Federal Supreme Court, only inadmissible exceptional courts operate. The same applies to the roster allocating court business at the administrative courts and finance courts. The only exception were the labour courts. These not only had roster allocating court business, which were drawn up in a mutually rotating system, they were also available on the Internet.
The purpose of roster allocating court business is to ensure that nobody knows in advance which judge will be assigned to which case. So if these plans are drawn up according to the ABC, then it is clear that the plaintiff or defendant will always stand before the same judge, which is prohibited by law.
How far-reaching such violations of the law are becomes clear when one realises that EU law or the UN International Covenant on Civil Rights also stipulates that a court (and thus also the judge) must be legal. With the violation of the laws on the distribution of responsibilities in the Basic Law and the Court Constitution Act (GVG) there are no statutory judges. This means that not a single judgment of such a court should be implemented internationally or in the EU.
For these reasons, we did not register the "Verein Bund für das Recht" Association Federation for the Law with the District Court, because we would have agreed to these violations of the law.
Thus, no right can be obtained at such courts (violation of the Hague Land Warfare Convention - HLWC/Hague IV. Convention - Art. 43).
Therefore no signed judgement is handed over and thus again all law (e.g. §§ 315, 317 ZPO) is violated.
Contrary to §§ 39, 40, 44 Beurkundungsgesetz (German Law on Public Deeds) or/and §§ 33, 34 Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz (Administrative Procedure Act) certified copies/transcriptions are handed out, which in case of doubt constitute the criminal offence of false certification in office (§ 348 StGB).
We drove to Sonneberg to testify to an illegal auction. We had the roster allocating court business shown to us. It should be the only one where the signatures of the judges were still in a list for possible signature comparisons. In the years to come we were to experience that these roster allocating court business shrank from a folder in 2007 to a few loose sheets in 2012 on which there was not a single signature left. Also the public accessibility of these plans changed drastically, from no problem at all to getting the folder and leafing through it/or even publishing it on the internet, until finally the attempt with a total refusal of access.
Another point was the abolition of the separation of powers.
The separation of powers between the judiciary and the Public Prosecutor's Office has been abolished. It could be seen in the press Neue Presse and the Coburger Tageblatt, how the group leader of the Coburg Public Prosecutor's Office (previously a judge at the Coburg Regional Court) Barausch was presented with the certificate of appointment, demonstratively not by a judge or official from the ministry, but by the Attorney General, framed by the Chief Senior Public Prosecutor and the retired Senior Public Prosecutor. So it could be clearly seen that there is a demonstration: No one can get past us.
The Regional Court Vice President Dr. Krauß at the Coburg Regional Court will be appointed Regional Court President at the Coburg Regional Court and his successor and subordinate, Mr. Buhl, will take action in the case in which the press has already reported that Dr. Krauß had the court record falsified. Furthermore, Dr. Krauß is elected President of the Judges' Association and thus has an influence on the appointment of judges and is the first to bring five new judges to the Coburg Court. Among them is the judge who advised the members of the Kunduz investigative committee. We will come back to the Kunduz later.
Of course our group was not the only one to deal with the arbitrariness of the courts. In Hamburg, for example, there was the ZEB association, founded by Mr. Sürmeli, who had received a ruling at the European Court of Human Rights confirming that in Germany appeals are not effective. At the end of 2007 we went to a ZEB event where participants from all over Germany met. But we will also come to that later.
First of all, the fraud trial went into the second round.
©2020 by Beowulf von Prince, Karin Leffer
Beowulf von Prince
Schweizer Str. 38