Memorium Nuremburg Military Tribunals
Friday, 22th of december: Christmas ahead. But at nuremburg court, the court where the Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals took place, judges are still working. In 2016 short after christmas Sascha U., a coloured man was imprisoned as mentally ill in straubing forensic clinic. Now, 2017, a judge will again look into this case – but not about what happened to sascha, but what happened to his 62 years old mother and his brother at the very same day afterwards. Police officers arrived to arrest sascha.
After that a police officer was bitten and the mother and the brother severily hurt. Hairs root out at a 62 years old mother doesnt look like police defending their duty.
Do Black Lives Matter?
Does racistic police violence happen in germany, especially in nuremburg which calls itself „city of human rights„. Matter black lives also in germany? Do we took care of our coloured friends? Or are there just two criminal persons who attacked more than 4 police officers without weapons? Court had to decide about it. Many pictures and doctor records proof that many things happened to mother and brother of sascha. But for the police officers, victims or attackers – was a big question lawyer Dr. Schneider Addaeh Mensah asked public – everything was different that what the coloured victims said.
Who is attacker? Who is victim?
Germany has a specific legal situation, so called „Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte“ (Resistance against officers on duty). This way an officer allways becomes a victim and witness while in normal case situation he is a potential attacker also.
The neighbour called the police after he seemed to be attacked by sascha with a butter knife. Such a knife is not able to cause severe wounds. When everything was solved – with mothers and brothers help – he did not let sascha alone at the roof but called the police. He did not mention that everything was calmed down allready and he just spoke about a knife. Arriving police was not able to securily say there is no danger for anyone anymore.
Police decided to enter the rooms of saschas family. What happened then was the case the judge had to solve – without any neutral witnesses around.
The mother bound in chains, lying on the floor. The brother also arrested and brought to police. An officer bitten. That were the fact. And several attests speaking about not less wounds. The first hospital the two coloured went to refused to help em. Because they were black or because of the neighbour went there allready?
Police said everything was correct. They had to go into the family rooms in search for the attacker. They had to look into cabinets and so on and as mother and brother wanted to act against them police had to react and use violence.
Only three neutral evidences are accessible: The wounds of the mother on her head: hairs bunked off:
Is this necessary to defend yourself as a police officer?
The more important fact was the attacked neighbour, of whome the family said he went to right wing demonstrations in nuremburg some time ago:
He could not remember of telling the police that sascha went into the family rooms cause the so called attacker was at the roof. Police officers said it different. But if you have a neutral victim and non-neutral officers whome would you believe?
Another spoken fact was that the neighbour said definitly nobody asked him about the brother, was the brother the attacker and so on – the only reason to take the brother to police station.
Also there police officers told it different.
In my opinion especially because the neighbour is not a friend of the family and perhaps of the families ethnics he is more truthfull than any officer.
Its an important fact because so the wish of the officers to enter the family rooms was illegal. And you are allowed to withstand against illegal measures.
State Attorney asked for jail
When the state attorney asked for punishment we all are shocked. Suspended sentence for the 62 old mother, fine for the brother. Both never had anything to do with criminal law except at this very special night. For the state attorney only police officers were good withnesses. What they said was clear. And because the found wounds of mother and brother were not hard enough it cannot have been happened what the two said. What the neighbour said was irrelevant and was not mentioned.
Not guilty, said the defenders
The Defenders plead for not guilty. Dr. Schneider Addaeh Mensah referred that in his opinion the §113 StGB is against constitutional law. Its unnecessary because it violence happens you can use any other violence norm. But with §113 StGB you make a police attacker to a witness, and the victim to an attacker. He as also a coloured person knows what it feels beeing black in germany, because he was attacked when we throw some documents to constitutional court mailbox. How ironic is this? A lawyer defending human and constitutional rights getting attacked by government because he is black and throwing mail into a mailbox?
Both defenders referred to what the neighbour said, the only person who did not need to lie for own reasons. Violence happened and even when these facts did not 100% match to what the mother and brother said there was no legal police job going on when entering the familyrooms.
As in every legal situation someone has to decide. In this case the judge followed the state attorney and spoke about fines for both mother and brother.
Because the two did not have enough wounds it cannot have been happened what these two said. What the neighbour said (and called the officers liers!) was not for interest for him. The police said the truth, the two black ones did not tell the truth.
The public was shocked, some women had tears in their eyes. When the public commented with anger noises the decision the judge said he will immediately let empty the room if persons continue to interrupt. But: Nobody insulted, nobody offended, nobody shouted loud. So this behaviour showed for me the most that the judge did know more that his decision said. If you think your decision is right you dont need to be so nervous, right?
Several evidences where not called to court. Two short after witnesses, Gustl Mollath and Martin Heidingsfelder, were not called to court. Both could have explained what mother and brother short after told to them, shocked and traumatized. Why did nobody want to hear the victim of bavarian government Gustl Mollath as witness?
And: No pen and paper was allowed into the court room. Even when we know that a feather is more mighty than a sword the truth is above everything. And a goverment who tries to forbide to document illegal court trials lost its ethical justification for having specific powers.
Michael Langhans, Nuremburg, for Activinews.com, 29.12.2017