Two sisters murdered in Krailling, uncle arrested

448 posts in this topic

It seems, according to today's Süddeutsche Zeitung, that his counsel tried very hard to pursuade him to not make this statement.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, an article in our daily paper said that he'd done himself in by deciding to talk and that the other side are now even more certain that he's their man.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is odd...and i still feel weird about this, my band played a private birthday party this past weekend at the bar the mother work at. i didn't find out the particulars of the gig until 5 days before and i almost refused to play it.

 

maybe i should have.

 

:unsure:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

zeek, life has to go on. A friend of mine lived in the apartment where the raid against the Israelis took place in 1972; people would always come by and ask if they could take a look around. One visitor said that the best thing that could happen was to see children playing in the rooms that had seen such mindless violence.

 

From the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Annette Ramelsberger):

 

When the trial finally ended most spectators felt only one sensation: Relief. No longer having to see Thomas S. sprawled in his seat in court, always wearing the same denim shirt. No longer having to listen to his explanations, defying all logic. No longer watching the self-presentation of a defendant who recognizes no guilt, refuses all responsibility. He seems to have repressed the events of 24 March last year to the extent that the verdict appears, to him, completely absurd.

 

Not only did the court find him guilty of killing his two nieces out of greed and sentence him to a lifelong sentence, it also stated considerable culpability – the strictest possible verdict. "His only redeeming feature is his hitherto guiltless life along with his desire to provide is wife and children with a pleasant home – and even that at the expense of others", stated the judge. There is no general orientation for the duration of his imprisonment as there has been no comparable case in German law history.

 

 

Am Ende hatten alle, die diesen Prozess beobachteten, nur noch das Gefühl: Hauptsache, es ist vorbei. Endlich nicht mehr den Angeklagten betrachten müssen, wie er sich in seiner Bank fläzt im immer gleichen Jeanshemd. Endlich keine seiner Erklärungen mehr hören müssen, die jeder Logik widersprechen. Endlich diesen Auftritten ein Ende machen, die nur der Selbstdarstellung eines Angeklagten dienen, der keine Schuld erkennt, der keine Verantwortung tragen mag.

The victims' mother addressed Thomas S. in court, using the impersonal "Sie" form in a desperate attempt to put some distance between herself and the her sister's husband, the man who killed her children: "You are demonstrating an unfeeling and merciless attitude. You have served up nonsense. You are posing in the courtroom as if you were giving autographs. You are behaving as if you were watching a badly refereed soccer game. And you still owe us the answer to the question: 'Why?'" The defendant merely shrugged his shoulders.

 

The victims' father's lawyer once more appealed to Thomas S. to take responsibility for his deed, saying "This story is not over for you today. You will be faced with the question of responsibility. An evaluating psychiatrist will ask you one day for your position towards responsibility, and if you don't concern yourself with it the prison doors will remain closed on you."

 

On the last day of the trial, Thomas S. decided to propound his theory of how his DNA ended up at the scene of the crime: The DA had it planted there, using blood drawn during his pretrial detention. Under total disregard of the fact that the DNA had been secured before his arrest, and that the comparison between the DNA found on the scene and his DNA was made using an oral swab, not blood. His lawyers contributed a statement that "this is not the defending counsel's opinion" – distancing themselves as far as possible from the content.

 

"I am fairly sure that I did not kill my nieces", the defendant's final statement commences. He refutes any demands to accept responsibility, sneeringly referring to appeals to his "moral conscience" and claiming that specialists who testified in the trial lied, one of the forensic scientists is married to one of the investigators, showing their own lack of moral integrity. He leafs through his file, tipping over the microphone in his search for errors that only he can see. While his lawyers sit with their backs to him, trying to keep straight faces, he digs his hole, deeper and wider than any prosecutor could have done, pointing out everyone elses' mistakes and not mentioning his one big mistake: Killing two little girls.

 

 

S. blättert wild durch die Aktenordner, wirft das Mikro um, auf der Suche nach den Fehlern. Niemand außer ihm kann welche finden. Seine Anwälte sitzen zu diesem Zeitpunkt nur noch vor ihm und versuchen, ihre Gesichtszüge nicht entgleisen zu lassen. Ihr Mandant hat sich selbständig gemacht und redet sich mit jedem Satz tiefer ins Verderben. Alle hier im Saal sind jetzt an ihrer psychischen Belastungsgrenze angelangt: Der Angeklagte redet und redet, über Fehler der Polizei, der Rechtsmedizin, über die Dummheit der anderen. Aber nicht über sich selbst.

Finally, he finishes. The prosecutor takes the floor with his final plea. But Thomas S. is not done yet. While the prosecutor describes how the girls were murdered Thomas S. mimes wringing someone's neck. He laughs while the prosecutor describes the 15 stab wounds that killed Sharon.

 

He managed to alienate his lawyers to the extent that they made the shortest possible final plea, stating that "while we recognize the well-founded chain of evidence", Thomas S. provided his interpretation of its strength. They did not plea for a specific sentence but set their "confidence in the court to find the correct verdict". In other words, they agreed with the indictment and the prosecutor's plea for lifelong without parole.

 

 

Am Ende hat Thomas S. sogar seine bis zuletzt engagierten Anwälte resignieren lassen. Sie belassen es bei einem kurzen Pflichtvortrag. Man verkenne die "tiefgreifende Indizienkette" nicht. Auf der anderen Seite habe man gehört, wie sich Herr S. damit auseinandergesetzt habe. Anwalt Adam Ahmed erklärt, man werde keinen konkreten Strafantrag stellen. "Wir haben großes Vertrauen in das Gericht, dass es ein richtiges Urteil fällen wird."

Cat says that he's likely to commit suicide in prison, and I agree. He'll spend a lot of time feeling sorry for himself, and watching his back, but eventually he will give up and rid the world of the privilege of his presence.

 

EDIT: He is going to appeal, requesting re-evaluation of the evidence. One can only hope that the court verifying the grounds for appeal will issue a judicially well-founded denial; everybody involved has received a lifelong sentence, they should not have to go through this kind of farce again.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While the prosecutor describes how the girls were murdered Thomas S. mimes wringing someone's neck. He laughs while the prosecutor describes the 15 stab wounds that killed Sharon.

 

Surely these are not the reactions of a sane person.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now