Dix-neuvième jour du procès à Aix-la-chapelle, 24 août 05

19th day in trial against Jose, Bart, Gabriel and Begonia

Today was the 19th day of trial in Aachen. It was supposed to begin at 10:00 and did so. The three prisoners had seen various visitors the day before and so their mood was pretty good. On the other hand one could see that the judges are kinda tired same for the court police that was cramped and did do the "oh, again-" thing.

At first judge Nohl declared the questioning of the residents isn’t finished yet. The person who saw when the change of escape cars took place that Bart did not enter the new car (Mercedes S-Type) by free will is still not identified yet.

Prosecutor Geimer handed out a comment that dealt with the conversation between him and the driver of the Mercedes whose car was used for the escape. In this chat the driver gave a vague description of the woman he saw standing at the corner.

Lawyer Pusch, defender of Begonia, applied for not needing to go on with the defense ’cos the mutual trust with his client isn’t intact anymore. Geimer rejected this application ’cos the explanation doesn’t justify it. Pusch made the application again with a more detailed explanation. He was speaking about "lasting misunderstandings" that are irreconcilable. Further things he can’t say ’cos this would be against the ethic code of secrecy.

The judges retreated for consulation which resulted in the dismisal of the application. Nohl read an article of the "Aachener Zeitung", 13th of august 2005, about the identification of residents to prevent a possible reproof by the defense ’cos of missing inquiry. Further he read a report of the Federal Criminal Police Office that was dealing with the analysis of the videos that lead to the conviction of Jose being the bank robber. It says the technical means of the Federal Criminal Police Office aren’t any better than the ones that were used to analyse the videos. That lead Nohl to the conclusion that there is no need to hear Mr. Rieger of the FCPO anymore.

Martin Poell, lawyer of Gabriel, read a statement regarding the dismissed application to assign an expert on traumata to see Gabriel ’cos of the years in isolation and torture in spanish prisons and do an expert opinion. He mentioned again when doing an expert opinion on "probands that might suffer from traumata" special skills are required (the statement can be found under www.escapeintorebellion.info) Lawyer Pusch und Israel, the defense of Jose, agreed to that statement.

After that there was a break ’cos the first witness didn’t appear yet. When the supporters intended on going back in passports shouldn’t be photocopied again. Other visitors of the trial were not plagued with that sanction. A discussion aroused and an explanation was demanded for the "special treatment", but beside "i can’t remember your face" (although some of the supporters are welcomed by name already) and "that’s the law" and similar arguments nothing was said by the authorities.

The first witness who was standing in the area where the cars used for escape where changed was heard then. She testified at the time when this happened she was neither in the streets nor at home. But there was an old man she met this evening when she was trying to see how securing of evidences is done. This man told her that his neighbor has seen everything. Unfortunately she didn’t know the man and therefore could not help clearing his identity. Pusch gave to the records that he can’t ask the witness any questions ’cos he can’t see the point since the mutual trust between him and his client isn’t intact. He applied for the immediate coordinateness of lawyer Schaefer from Aachen. The application was rejected by Nohl within seconds what lead Pusch to demanding a decision by the chamber. The decision made after 10 minutes affirmed Nohls rejection.

Nohl announced the lunch break and ’cos the supporters expected the passports to be checked again they were exchanged. The court police was overstrained by this neat trick and the right people were laughing this time. But the beginning of the hearing of the second witness was missed. But the witness couldn’t say anything about what happened on 28th of june 2004 anyways. Same for the third witness.

Lawyer Pusch said again he can’t ask any questions of the missing trust of his client. He applied for lawyer Schaefer to be the second public defender and added that when the new dates for upcoming days in court were arranged after the last day in court he announced that from the 5th of september 2005 on he won’t be part of the trial anymore and another lawyer will be ordered. Another break occured ’cos the chamber did consultation and the court room was cleared of from supporters and defendants. The passports of the visitors weren’t checked this time, but the first person who was checked (that means first supporter other visitors weren’t disturbed) was supposed to take off his shoes, so all the supporters did so and moved barefoot and placed their shoes right on the barrier between the supporters and the section for other visitors.

The application of Pusch was dismissed. Lawyer Lindemann, Barts lawyer, applied for to see the last chapter of the identification of residents what was done then. Lindemann wanted to know under which circumstances the police investigated ’cos obviously the residents didn’t get the right questionnaire, just questionnaires that weren’t concrete enough to lead to the demanded results.

Lawyer Olaf Franke, Barts second lawyer, made the application to hear the identified woman ’cos she could affirm that it wasn’t Bart initiative to get in the second car used for escape, but he was ordered to do so. Barts intention was it to orientate to distance himself from the others. He knows that this woman is the one the court is looking for. Geimer rejected that application ’cos of delay of the trial and assumed the defense wants to search entire Aachen for a woman that matches with the vague description of the driver of the Merecedes.

The application was rejected by Nohl, too, ’cos there are not enough clues that she is the woman and the duty of disclosure was served well here.

Another application of Barts defense demanded to put the results of the questionnaire to the records, getting access to it and do the questioning again since the questions were formulated in the wrong way. Geimer did say something about intentional delay of the trial again and defense retorted he should find a new justification for his rejection and don’t repeat his stuff just like a reflex all the time.

In the meantime Nohl gave to the records that the audience of the left side of the court room was reproved when further "disturbances" like comments, shouts, laughing will result in clearing of the court. When the chambers retreated for consultation about the last applications the group of supporters changed the side from left to right. Over there a group of young women was already sitting and Geimer asked them to get away from the supporters - expect for one woman all of them did so. When the chamber returned Nohl gave to the records the before mentioned group of the audience changed from the left side to the right and from now what he said about the left side counts for this side as well : silence is required.

Regaring the application the questionnaire the lawyers want to see at the following day of the trial they can’t decide at present ’cos they don’t have the questionnaires yet .

This is the end of this day of the trial. Tomorrow at 09:00, 25th of august 2005, the trial goes on in room number 338. It is possible that this will be the last day of the trial, although the proclamation of sentence is more likely to be announced on 5th of september.