Day 2 Of The Ernst
Zundel Holocaust
Heresy Trial

By Markus Haverkamp
Regional Court Mannheim
Today's hearing was to commence at 10.00, by which time over a hundred supporters had gathered in the lobby of the building. There were quite a few new faces amongst the visitors, and again there were visitors from abroad. There were very few journalists indeed, and only a couple of cameras. The security regulations were far stricter today; neither cameras nor bags were allowed, which is not too unusual, but in addition, plastic bottles were not permitted either. Furthermore, there were at least twice as many police officials in the courtroom than last week.
The pubic was admitted into the courtroom at 10.40. The room was absolutely packed and twenty-odd people were unable to get seats and had to wait outside. Ernst Zündel entered the room at 10.50, shortly before the judges and jurors, and was greeted with a warm applause.
The judge, having entered, started by warning the public that moaning and applause would not be tolerated and that he had given the police the order to keep an eye on the public and remove any disturbers from the courtroom as well as taking down their names.
Next, Dr. Meinerzhagen dismissed Ernst Zündel's petition that the judge is biased as unfounded. He stated that there are no reasons for the accused to have doubts in the judge.
Following on from here, the judge corroborated his dismissal of Sylvia Stolz as mandatory lawyer (i.e. counsel of the defence appointed by the court), and repeated the reasons he had given the previous week, as well as saying that Miss Stolz is too close to the accused. Meinerzhagen stated that he had so decided not due to any emotional impulse, but on an objective, factual basis. He again argued that Miss Stolz is not suited because she cannot guarantee an orderly procedure, and that this would lead to conflicts between the accused and the defence.
The judge continued by giving an official statement that Jürgen Rieger and Dr. Herbert Schaller would also not be accepted as counsel of the defence appointed by the court. Dr. Meinerzhagen stated that his reasons for so doing are appropriate and expedient, and that this is necessary in order to avoid a delay of the proceedings.
In his next move, the judge rejected Miss Stolz' petition to exclude the public from the hearings. He said that the public can only be excluded from the trial, if it represents a threat, and that this is not the case. On the contrary, it is the defence which represents a threat to the trial because its intention is to incite the People. Furthermore, it is to be expected that the defence would file inciting petitions and motions to hear evidence if the public were excluded.
Dr Meinerzhagen followed this move by deciding to suspend the proceedings. He gave the following reasons: A new mandatory lawyer is to be appointed by the court. In light of the sheer mass of files, he would need time to become acquainted with the material. The trial is thus to be suspended until the new lawyer has had the opportunity to prepare himself for the trial.
Zündel is to be kept in gaol; this is just, when bearing in mind the seriousness of his offence. The suspension of the hearings, Meinerzhagen continued, is the fault of the defence.
At this point Jürgen Rieger stated that since the judge had not informed the defence of his intention to suspend the proceedings - something the judge is obliged to do, the defence had not been given the opportunity to make a statement on this decision. Later on the judge stated that he had indeed informed the defence of this intention - a blatant lie.
The judge then said that Zündel may name a mandatory lawyer. He pointed out how important it is that the lawyer of his choice has his trust. At 11.20 the hearing was interrupted for five minutes in order to allow Ernst Zündel to make a decision.
When the proceeding continued five minutes later, Zündel stated that he would appoint Dr. Schaller as his mandatory lawyer, and that Schaller is in best health. Dr. Schaller immediately said that he is prepared to take on this role.
Ulrich Meinerzhagen stated that the panel needs time to decide on this point, and that the panel also needs to hear the comment of the public prosecutor.
Rieger simply asked: "Why can't we do this now?" The judge then asked for the public prosecutor's opinion, and Großmann, the public prosecutor, said that he does not believe that Dr. Schaller is suited for this task.
Jürgen Rieger then asked why the court could not come to a decision today, and stated that the court cannot suspend the proceedings ad infinitum since Zündel is in jail, and that this is not in the interest of the accused. Meinerzhagen had, after all, unctuously stated that the proceeding ought to be swift.
Here followed a verbal battle between the judge and the defence, which went something like this:
Meinerzhagen: "We will not decide on this issue today."
Stolz: "I wish to make a statement concerning my dismissal as mandatory lawyer."
Meinerzhagen: "That's out of the question!"
Stolz: "You cannot do that, this is out of order!"
Meinerzhagen: "The trial is adjourned."
Stolz: "I have not had the opportunity to make my statement!"
Meinerzhagen: "I don't care!!! The proceedings are stayed!"
It was now 11.40, and upon the final words of the judge, the public vociferously voiced their disapproval and anger, shouting things like "this is a carnival!", "scandal!", "you just want to be off to celebrate your birthday!", etc.
The court is thus continuing along the path it has set itself. The trial will most likely be resumed February/March 2006.
After the hearing, Ernst Zündel's supporters and lawyers met for a discussion, during which Jürgen Rieger gave some interesting background information concerning the trial.
It seems that the judge will attempt to persecute the defence when they start defending Zündel. In order to prevent the trial from falling through, due to all lawyers having been thrown out (which would cast a negative light on Meinerzhagen), the judge wishes to have a court appointed defence lawyer who will follow his whims. He can then press charges against the defence team for voicing forbidden thoughts in public, have them expelled from the case and will then be able to quickly end the proceedings by sentencing Zündel, his personally appointed defence lawyer meekly playing along in this charade.
According to generally valid norms, the judge would of course have to appoint Dr Schaller as mandatory defence lawyer, since Herbert Schaller is neither close to Horst Mahler (Sylvia Stolz) nor has he got a criminal record (Jürgen Rieger). Not to appoint Dr Schaller due to his age is unheard of and no reason at all - in particular since Dr Schaller (84) is fit as a fiddle.
Jürgen Rieger also related to us that the judge has limited Ernst Zündel's mail. Zündel is allowed only two letters per day and these only when they are not longer than five pages. The letters he receives are picked randomly out of a box. Printed matters are forbidden.
Since Zündel has many printed texts relating to his defence in Canada, printed texts are sent to Herr Rieger to evaluate who has to return the texts within three days. (To show the ridiculousness of the situation, Rieger received a book of pictures about Tyrol, which the publishers had sent Zündel as a gift.)
The judge is thus refusing Zündel to view the files which his Canadian lawyers are sending him. Also, before the trial started the judge said that Zündel would be sentenced to more than four years gaol.
Whilst the trial and ensuing meeting was taking place, Germar Rudolf was flown into Germany where, upon arrival at Frankfurt Airport he was arrested and taken to the prison in Stuttgart. Also, the Flemish Revisionist Siegfried Verbeke has recently been arrested in Amsterdam and is to be extradited to Germany. The enemy must think that he has secured a brilliant victory by making Germany the focal point of his Holocaust show trails. Hubris, however, leads to nemesis and the sudden influx of show trials, where prominent people are being jailed for their thoughts, will lead to the enemy's downfall and the liberation of not only the German People but of all European Peoples from foreign rule, a rule based solely on the Rule of the Lie.
Second Report (Sent by Anonymous)
Let me try to clarify some points concerning the trial, because, from my understanding, there are some mistakes in several articles. Most of the ones in the msm are full of errors, libel and slander. Part of this, I assume, is due to an erratic agency´s piece of news.
The trial is not "geplatzt". The trial is suspended. That means of course, that it will go on, and no new one will be opened.
Sylvia Stolz still is one of Ernst´s lawyers, but the judge recalled the public mandate from her. This was obviously only given to her "erratically", not knowing her engagement and contentional closeness to the defendant.
Dr. Schaller was suggested by J.Rieger as new mandatory lawyer and Ernst was asked, if he would agree: he affirmed his wish. But: the judge would not decide on this. Not now, although Rieger proposed this as plausible and urgent, because the defendant is in jail.
So: Schaller is not thrown out, if not some time after the trial was closed on tuesday, he decided in written and sent this decision to the parties. J. Rieger or S.Stolz should be the first to know and have the possibility to answer this move.
I expect for sure that the judge will in short time present a typical, Mannheim-based, well functioning lawyer as a mandatory lawyer.
Concerning the judges acts as a human, i.e. using or not his clearance (?):
He could easily give Ernst all his letters. He is allowed to receive two of them a day.
Not even the urgent letters from Ernst´s canadian lawyers are given to him, neither to the lawyers!
Letters with more than five pages have no chance to reach him. Letters that are declared as being written from nutty supporters are ruled out. Everything is put in boxes as Ernst´s "Habe". Means: he will get it when he leaves the jail!
Three or so of the letters are picked by accidance and given to e.g. J.Rieger to judge their importance. There are, for example, calendars or books with pictures of german landscapes, so that Ernst could bring some "heimatliche" atmosphere into his cell.( source: J.Rieger)
The judge could and of course should set Ernst free at once. He insists on him staying in jail, because of the defendant´s character and liability to continue the alleged crimes.
He also is not ready to discount his prisoners time in the canadian jail from the "sentence to expect"!! Btw this seems to be one of the points, why Mannheim was chosen. Normally it would start with an "Amtsgericht" - trial. But Mannheim is known as very hard in its "Volksverhetzungs"-sentences. And the judge declared this Court for competent (for the jurisdiction in this case). Not in the public trial, but in the pre-trial exchanging of the accusation and the reply..."because a sentence of more than four years is to expect".



This Site Served by TheHostPros