'judge' Frank Haberzettel presiding
To all -
this is important. Dirk Zimmerman is another young German man who
has turned himself in for "Holocaust Denial" in Germany. I wish
we
had 10,000 Dirk Zimmermans - it would bring the lying system crashing
down!
He was brutally sentenced for 9 months in the Zionist-controlled
so-called "Bundesrepublik" - if I get his prison address, I will
send it out as well.
Please post this far and wide!
Ingrid
>Dear all,
>today the long awaited trial against Dirk Zimmerman, who had sent a
>copy of Germar Rudolf's "Lectures on the Holocaust" to the mayor
of
>Heilbronn as well as to the Catholic and Lutheran minister of his
>community, took place. In short: He was tried before a magistrate's
>court (Amtsgericht).. The court room was absolutely packed, many
>visitors having to bring in chairs from other rooms in the building
>so that they could still get a seat. The supporters were all
>fabulously behaved - no laughing, sniggering, moaning, fidgeting,
>whispering, etc., absolutely nothing. All were well dressed. The
>judge - Frank Haberzettel - opened the proceedings at about 13.45.
>He first verified Dirk's personal details, then the prosecutor read
>the indictment. The usual stuff: Rudolf's book is full of
>anti-Semitism, he incites to racial hatred, etc., etc. Zimmerman is
>endangering the public peace by distributing said book, and
>furthermore, Zimmerman wishes that the addressees spread this book.
>He demanded 9 months jail, no suspension of the sentence.
>After Dirk's defending council pointed out that they would not be
>bothering the court with motions to hear evidence, Haberzettel
>proceeded to question the accused. The questions were very direct,
>why had he sent the books? does he agree with the content of
>Rudolf's book? has he read other, mainstream history books on WW2
>history? why had he sent the books to these specific people? in case
>he were convicted, would he continue along this path after having
>served the penalty for his crime? etc., etc. Dirk answered all
>questions truthfully, calmly and clearly, mainly pointing out that
>he doubts the veracity of the Holo story and demands the right to
>the freedom of opinion and speech. The last question posed was
>problematic, however, since Dirk was unwilling to lie. Haberzettel
>repeated the question numerous times, Dirk finding it difficult to
>answer truthfully without blowing all hope for an acquittal, yet at
>the same time finding it imposible to lie.
>After the questions had been answered to the judge's satisfaction,
>Haberzettel called in a witness - the police officer who had
>initially questioned Dirk. The officer told the court that Dirk
>agreed with the contents of the book, and that he had made a polite
>and decent impression on him. The statement given by the officer was
>interesting in as that he corroborated everything Dirk had
>previously told the court. The witness also told the court that Dirk
>had crossed out the word "Deutsch" in the section of the protocol
>declaring the person's nationality, and had replaced it with
>"Deutsches Reich". Asked why he had done so, Dirk pointed out
that
>"Deutsch" is an adjective and cannot correctly be used to describe
>nationality.
>Then came the closing statements. The prosecutor highlighted the
>danger of denial and dissemination of such literature, referred to
>Rudolf's book as a load of evil tosh, and described Dirk as a
>confused and twisted fanatic. The usual stuff. The defending council
>then made his final statement, saying that even though he thoroughly
>believes in the Holo, Dirk was a decent, polite chap who had done
>nothing wrong and that he must be acquitted. Finally, Dirk made his
>closing statement, where he showed that the prosecutor was lying
>when he said that Dirk asked the addressees of the book to
>disseminate it, something Dirk had not done, and also showed that
>being cast as a fanatic was absolutely ridiculous as he was only
>interested in freedom of speech. All in all a good, solid short
>speech that came from the heart.
>Haberzettel then withdrew for 40 minutes to consider how to rule in
>this matter. At 15.35 he read out the verdict: 9 months jail,
>sentence will not be suspended. As reasons he stated that even
>though freedom of speech is granted, this does not extend to the
>Holo. There is no debating the Holo because it had taken place.
>Again the usual stuff. As for the severity of the sentence the judge
>pointed out that Dirk had not taken the "golden bridge" he had
>extended him, i.e. that Dirk had given the wrong answer to the final
>question: would he continue on this path in the future? Haberzettel
>said that Dirks social prognosis was indeed good, as he's married,
>has two children and does not have a criminal record. And then
>literally: "Your criminal prognosis, however, is shocking, and I'm
>confident that we have not seen the last of you here."
>And that was that: for sending Rudolf's book to three people, Dirk
>Zimmerman, father of two, no criminal record, in a steady job, was
>given nine months prison.
>Markus Haverkamp
locaust Denial" in Germany. I wish we
had 10,000 Dirk Zimmermans - it would bring the lying system crashing
down!
He was brutally sentenced for 9 months in the Zionist-controlled
so-called "Bundesrepublik" - if I get his prison address, I will
send it out as well.
Please post this far and wide!
Ingrid
>Dear all,
>today the long awaited trial against Dirk Zimmerman, who had sent a
>copy of Germar Rudolf's "Lectures on the Holocaust" to the mayor
of
>Heilbronn as well as to the Catholic and Lutheran minister of his
>community, took place. In short: He was tried before a magistrate's
>court (Amtsgericht).. The court room was absolutely packed, many
>visitors having to bring in chairs from other rooms in the building
>so that they could still get a seat. The supporters were all
>fabulously behaved - no laughing, sniggering, moaning, fidgeting,
>whispering, etc., absolutely nothing. All were well dressed. The
>judge - Frank Haberzettel - opened the proceedings at about 13.45.
>He first verified Dirk's personal details, then the prosecutor read
>the indictment. The usual stuff: Rudolf's book is full of
>anti-Semitism, he incites to racial hatred, etc., etc. Zimmerman is
>endangering the public peace by distributing said book, and
>furthermore, Zimmerman wishes that the addressees spread this book.
>He demanded 9 months jail, no suspension of the sentence.
>After Dirk's defending council pointed out that they would not be
>bothering the court with motions to hear evidence, Haberzettel
>proceeded to question the accused. The questions were very direct,
>why had he sent the books? does he agree with the content of
>Rudolf's book? has he read other, mainstream history books on WW2
>history? why had he sent the books to these specific people? in case
>he were convicted, would he continue along this path after having
>served the penalty for his crime? etc., etc. Dirk answered all
>questions truthfully, calmly and clearly, mainly pointing out that
>he doubts the veracity of the Holo story and demands the right to
>the freedom of opinion and speech. The last question posed was
>problematic, however, since Dirk was unwilling to lie. Haberzettel
>repeated the question numerous times, Dirk finding it difficult to
>answer truthfully without blowing all hope for an acquittal, yet at
>the same time finding it imposible to lie.
>After the questions had been answered to the judge's satisfaction,
>Haberzettel called in a witness - the police officer who had
>initially questioned Dirk. The officer told the court that Dirk
>agreed with the contents of the book, and that he had made a polite
>and decent impression on him. The statement given by the officer was
>interesting in as that he corroborated everything Dirk had
>previously told the court. The witness also told the court that Dirk
>had crossed out the word "Deutsch" in the section of the protocol
>declaring the person's nationality, and had replaced it with
>"Deutsches Reich". Asked why he had done so, Dirk pointed out
that
>"Deutsch" is an adjective and cannot correctly be used to describe
>nationality.
>Then came the closing statements. The prosecutor highlighted the
>danger of denial and dissemination of such literature, referred to
>Rudolf's book as a load of evil tosh, and described Dirk as a
>confused and twisted fanatic. The usual stuff. The defending council
>then made his final statement, saying that even though he thoroughly
>believes in the Holo, Dirk was a decent, polite chap who had done
>nothing wrong and that he must be acquitted. Finally, Dirk made his
>closing statement, where he showed that the prosecutor was lying
>when he said that Dirk asked the addressees of the book to
>disseminate it, something Dirk had not done, and also showed that
>being cast as a fanatic was absolutely ridiculous as he was only
>interested in freedom of speech. All in all a good, solid short
>speech that came from the heart.
>Haberzettel then withdrew for 40 minutes to consider how to rule in
>this matter. At 15.35 he read out the verdict: 9 months jail,
>sentence will not be suspended. As reasons he stated that even
>though freedom of speech is granted, this does not extend to the
>Holo. There is no debating the Holo because it had taken place.
>Again the usual stuff. As for the severity of the sentence the judge
>pointed out that Dirk had not taken the "golden bridge" he had
>extended him, i.e. that Dirk had given the wrong answer to the final
>question: would he continue on this path in the future? Haberzettel
>said that Dirks social prognosis was indeed good, as he's married,
>has two children and does not have a criminal record. And then
>literally: "Your criminal prognosis, however, is shocking, and I'm
>confident that we have not seen the last of you here."
>And that was that: for sending Rudolf's book to three people, Dirk
>Zimmerman, father of two, no criminal record, in a steady job, was
>given nine months prison.
>Markus Haverkamp