ANOTHER CITIZEN JOURNALIST SPEAKS OUT. Day 2 and Day 3 of the trial.

The email asked: Would I publish her experience of being at Reiner’s trial, days 2 and 3. My answer: yes. I’ve published a couple of views, but each new perspective adds to what we know.

So here it is:

DAY 2 - Accused

(Court hearing Reiner Fuellmich, Goettingen, 2.2.2024)

by Daniela Goeken

God's are the waves and wind,
but the sails and helm,
that you reach the harbor,
are yours.
(Johannes Kienau, inscription in Bremen Town Hall)

It's a big moment for me: for the first time in my life, I'm entering a courtroom. No, not as a participant in the proceedings, just as a spectator and, of course, as a supporter of the defendant.

I am pleasantly surprised. Although there are strict controls at the entrance, although they check whether I have any weapons on me, although they take everything I have on me (apart from a notebook and a pen), the staff show that they are not brutes and can also be friendly. Sometimes they even turn a blind eye. But more of that later.

The room is not very big, everything is quite close together, but this is a good thing, because even as a spectator you feel as if you are right in the middle of the action. It's also not as gloomy as I imagined: A large window front lets in plenty of light and fresh air is also provided.

At one end of the room are the tables where the participants will be seated: On one side the defendant with a defense lawyer, on the other side are the name tags with the names of the two plaintiffs. It will remain relatively empty there, as only the prosecutor will appear from the side of the plaintiffs. Only separated from the trial area by a low wall are the 3 rows of spectator seats. They are arranged in ascending order so that everyone has a good view of the proceedings. I am very pleased that almost all the spectator seats are occupied. This means that the relatively high level of support for the defendant among the public can always be seen and experienced by those conducting the trial.

Today we are dealing with the further questioning of the accused, which was not concluded at the first hearing.

I am very surprised, and again pleasantly so. The conversation between the judge and the defendant are conducted as equals. It doesn't sound at all like how you would imagine the questioning of a man who has been in prison for almost 4 months.

Sometimes you even get the impression that they are sitting together as confidants, one of whom is telling anecdotes from his life. Yes, the defendant tells many anecdotes from his life, but this is not because he is so talkative and likes to divulge secrets, but rather because the story that has to be told here, that is finally allowed to be told, is an extremely complicated and mysterious one that leaves your mouth hanging open, that makes you laugh and cry and wonder, and that brings up completely different feelings in the listeners, feelings like dismay, disbelief, and ... perhaps even anger. Anger at a group of people who seem to have conspired to ruin another person, to ruin them in every way (there's no other way to put it).

The most emotional, almost heartbreaking part is what the defendant says when the judge asks him about his financial situation and mentions his wife. It becomes clear that he is only worried about her, not at all about himself. Yet he is actually the one who has to carry the biggest, almost unbearable burden.

At first, he describes her as follows: "She's very clever. And she's very reserved. ... She's a little angel!" And then comes the decisive, thoroughly accusatory sentence, addressed above all to the prosecutor who is sitting there and who is responsible for everything: "And she is severely damaged by this!"

So as not to give the wrong impression: this is by no means a fairytale lesson. It's not as if the defendant is just chatting or telling stories. He has several folders with him, which he is very familiar with, so he can back up everything he says.

I stay in my seat during the short break. The defendant is also allowed to stay in the room and is not taken to his uncomfortable waiting cell in the basement. A thought occurs to me. Now would actually be the opportunity to ask him the question that has been on my mind for a long time: when would the story that he had started to tell the public finally be continued, the story about what had happened to him in the Corona Committee and in the time that followed. There was still so much that remained mysterious and for which I would have liked an explanation.

When I asked whether I was allowed to speak to the accused, the employee replied in the negative. But the person concerned, who is well versed in the law, intervenes and says that he is allowed to speak to visitors. So I dare to ask my question. During the short conversation, I realize that the defendant could go on and on with stories, all of them stories that incriminate the complainants and people associated with them. Well, the trial has only just begun. In any case, the entertainment value is already very high and you can guess what dimensions it could take on.

In conclusion, I can say that I am very happy to have taken the one and a half hour drive to be able to attend the trial live. And this was definitely not my last visit to the beautiful city of Goettingen. The most exciting part is yet to come: the hearing of the complainants who have not yet made an appearance. Then the guesswork about their deeper motives can begin, because this is certainly the first time in history that critical people have come together in a government-independent investigative committee to work together to shed light on the situation, only to be dragged to court afterwards for relatively trivial matters (compared to the crimes they actually wanted to solve). But everything has its purpose in life. Something good will also come out of it. Let us not forget:

God's are the waves and wind,
but the sails and helm,
that you reach the harbor,
are yours.

The fact that Reiner Füllmich is able to navigate his personal ship safely through high waves and strong storms like no other has probably become clear to us all in the last few years in which we have been able to follow his work. He is a kind of modern hero, as the attention his case has received around the world shows. I hope that he makes it safely to port very soon, that he can resume his normal life as quickly as possible and that he can embrace his wife! He certainly has the skills to set the sails correctly and to handle the helm sensitively!

May the strong winds that have caught him and would have blown someone else over have a beneficial effect. We will all benefit from it.

And then …

DAY 3 - Among Traitors

(A report on the trial of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich in Goettingen on 7.2.2024)

by Daniela Goeken

The problem with the witness who was to be heard today was that he couldn't actually remember the exact events he wanted to report on. Additions such as: "If I remember correctly..." followed almost every single sentence. Despite this, and perhaps precisely because of it, he spent two hours telling us one irrelevant and not very amusing story after another. He used very flowery descriptions for everything and always went into great detail, practically starting with Adam and Eve by describing the Garden of Eden to us in great detail. What did we learn that we didn't want to know (the judges certainly didn't either) and which had absolutely nothing to do with the accusations he was supposed to explain to us. His language was very complicated and he seemed to be trying to give the impression that he was a good storyteller and that his story was of general interest. Maybe he just wanted to attract attention for as long as possible, we don't know. For example, it seemed important to him to know the names of the restaurants where he met the accused, where exactly they were located, what you could eat there, where the toilets were and other meaningful things.

It was even more important for the witness and complainant to discreetly put the accused in a bad light, in passing, and in a rather chummy way. For example, we learned that the defendant had once confided to the witness in a friendly conversation that he and his wife had met in a psychiatric clinic. (Interjection by the defendant: "I have never been in a psychiatric hospital in my entire life!") In addition, the defendant allegedly discriminated against the witness because of his ethnic origin. (The racism cudgel always works. Interjection from the defendant: "I don't know what your ethnic origin is!" Which is understandable, because there is nothing unusual about the witness). According to the witness, the accused is also said to have often made anti-Semitic remarks. (If the racism cudgel hasn't worked yet, then the anti-Semitism cudgel is unpacked, it helps in any case). When questioned, however, the witness didn't know anything more precise, in any case he never wanted to commit himself to anything, he always left a back door open to escape in an emergency. I can well understand that. After all, he was at a trial and making false statements is a punishable offense. In any case, it became clearer by the minute that the credibility of this witness could certainly be called into question. That will become clearer when the questioning, especially the questioning by the defendant, has begun.

But I want to start from the beginning:

Of course I went there again, because I was very interested to see whether the two complainants would actually appear. After all, they had been diagnosed with an illness at the meetings last week. Perhaps they had infected each other? There's no other explanation for the fact that the poor things had fallen ill at the same time, especially on such an important day.

When I enter the room, it's already pretty full because I'm late. I get a seat near the tables designated for the accusers' side. I'm amazed: as empty as this side was last time, it's just as full today. Viviane Fischer, the fourth of the Corona Committee founders, has also joined us. And both of them, who were ill last week, have recovered, just in time for their interview.

I'm told that Viviane Fischer has joined the two complainants.

Now I have to go on a bit, but don't worry, it won't be as bad as today's testimony! So, for me personally, September 2, 2022 is a very dark day that brought great changes, that destroyed hopes and that was basically the beginning of the end. I see Viviane Fischer in front of me (only on my screen, of course), nervously playing with her hands and making mysterious, dark hints. You don't actually find out anything more specific, except that Reiner Füllmich will no longer be attending the meetings until further notice. Then there's something about disinfectants being needed, but it's not clear to me what for. I wouldn't have put Reiner Füllmich in the dirty corner.

The way Viviane Fischer simply kicked her equal partner out of the collaborative project, after telling him shortly before that the meeting in which she wanted to announce this wasn't even going to take place, really went against the grain for me. There were only vague hints that Reiner Füllmich had done something bad. But for a very long time you didn't find out what it was actually about. Even the federal executive committee of the party "die Basis", of which the two were still the dual leadership at the time, was not informed about what had happened. It was of great importance, because a party in which the dual leadership is at enmity, can no longer work together or even talk to each other, is unlikely to be elected by anyone. It's a very unpleasant story that I don't want to go into any further now. What remains is a very bad feeling, anger at those who caused the rift and great disappointment. Important beacons of hope for the truth movement, namely the Corona Committee and the party "Die Basis", were practically destroyed by design. This party, to which I belong, and which I think is the only one you can vote for with a clear conscience, has been losing members massively since then and the Corona Committee, which Viviane Fischer has continued to run alone, is nowhere near the audience figures it used to have when Reiner Füllmich was still involved.

For these reasons, I don't necessarily burst into storms of enthusiasm when I see Viviane Fischer sitting there that morning, on the side of the complainants. The sight brings back memories for me. Memories of the 125th meeting of the Corona Committee, when five people came together to judge a former companion in his absence.

There is now a great imbalance in this trial, which the defense lawyer is the first to notice. She says that the circumstances have now changed and that she feels overwhelmed as the only defense lawyer.

First, the witness and complainant Justus Hoffmann is asked to sit on the chair in the middle, the so-called "witness chair". It is not just a chair, there is also a small table in front of it. During his testimony, the witness will repeatedly lean on it demonstratively with his hands, as if he is about to jump up. Unfortunately, I can't see this very well as I'm sitting directly behind him, but I can clearly see that the witness is not necessarily calm and is struggling with many insecurities and violent outbursts of emotion.

I have already described how the first two hours go at the beginning of my report. I sink deeper and deeper into my chair and try desperately to keep my eyes open. In my mind, I've already decided never to come back to a court hearing, not unless I absolutely have to. Then the witness finally finishes his rambling remarks and is asked questions. The judge and the prosecutor want to know a few things, but their questions have slipped my mind. I was probably still in a daze. Fortunately, the lunch break is soon announced.

An hour later, everyone is seated again. Now it really gets down to business. Because now the defendant, who is an experienced trial lawyer and has certainly given many a witness hell, is allowed to ask his questions.

In my first report, I wrote that it doesn't feel to me as if a trial is taking place in front of a court. This is even more the case today. When the defendant questions the witness, you can see the two of them sitting together at a table, discussing and often arguing with each other. It is a very heated exchange. The judge often issues admonitions, as he says he has a duty to ensure that the questioning is conducted properly and that the answers are not evaluated. But the two opponents can hardly be restrained. To be honest, I can understand that, because this is the first time that the defendant has been given the right to question the accuser about his accusation. The situation is highly emotionally charged. The defendant has had practically round-the- clock time to mull over everything for months, as he was locked in a prison cell and denied the opportunity to lead a normal life.

He now works through the extensive indictment, annotated by Viviane Fischer, and questions the witness about his sometimes outrageous accusations. There is often resentment in the auditorium, but it is very restrained, as no comments are allowed. Suppressed laughter is also frequently heard.

Although the defendant clearly shows how badly he respects the witness, he always pulls himself together, silently accepts the incoherent, stammered answer and moves on to the next, excellently formulated question.

I think even the last person in the courtroom is beginning to realize that the complainant's main aim is to put the defendant in a bad light, a very bad light. There is talk of threats of violence against the witness, of Stasi-methods that the accused is said to have used and many more unpleasant things. Even the spectators sometimes feel attacked. As supporters of the accused, they are said to have blindly followed him and put him on a pedestal. Anyone who criticized this man could expect to be persecuted by his supporters. As members of the party "Die Basis", they are said to have done nothing when the accused used evil methods to put himself at the head of the party. They had become radicalized under the leadership of the accused and were thus a great threat to the witness. The word "fear" is a frequently used one. The witness was afraid of having to raise the corporation tax of the Corona Foundation Committee alone, he was afraid that he and Antonia Fischer would be left alone in this committee, he was even afraid that the accused would take out a gun and shoot him down, just like that. The biggest mystery in this story is probably this:

This plaintiff does not feel he belongs to the truth movement. He uses the term "Querdenker" in a derogatory way. He does not feel that enlightenment is necessary. He is only interested in the Corona Committee's money and has no intention of ever working there again.

Why is he going to the enormous effort of going to court and suing for the return of donations received by this committee?

All the spectators at the committee meetings hold their stomachs with laughter, because they know exactly how rarely Justus Hoffmann took part in the work and how sparing his contributions were, even when he was still physically present.

The amusement in the auditorium subsides and it becomes quiet again when the defense attorney asks her questions. She also has a lot of them and, as it is already late, the questioning has to be interrupted and the session for the day ended.

It looks like it's going to be a long trial, because the questioning of witness Antonia Fischer, which was also planned for that day, hasn't even started yet. And Viviane Fischer certainly still has a lot to say.

After the first two hours, which were so agonizing that I thought the witness would still not have arrived at the point by the end of the day, I had already decided never to come back. In the afternoon, however, the entertainment value skyrocketed from zero to one hundred. There has certainly never been so much (suppressed) laughter in a courtroom. The witness ended up sitting in front of the defendant like a heap of misery, at least that's how it looked from my perspective. I have to admit that I wasn't entirely sad about it.

In my opinion, however, the questioning of the plaintiff was not absolutely necessary to reach a verdict. The defendant was already able to prove at the first two hearings that the accusations against him were completely unfounded. Whoever came up with this hair-raising story - I have my suspicions as to which side these people are on - did not do a particularly good job, fortunately for all of us. You couldn't make up a more absurd story. We all know that: This man gives his heart and soul to the investigation of crimes against humanity. He has proven that to us many times. Even before the pandemic, when most of us first became active, he stood up for ordinary citizens, small real estate investors, to protect them from large, fraudulent corporations.

He is a clever and far-sighted lawyer with decades of experience. Therefore, he is unlikely to carelessly endanger his own work, his worldwide efforts, by taking money out of the donation box to pretty up his garden, a garden he will never use because he will sell the house anyway. He would never do that for two reasons: firstly, he is taking away his own basis for work, because yes, this committee is HIS baby, no matter what the three co-founders say. I can judge that as a viewer. He always seemed alert and attentive, communicated best with the guests, asked the most important questions and took notes of everything he heard. Which is more than you can say for his fellow contestants. Viviane Fischer always sat in front of a rather empty-looking sheet of paper and often uttered equally empty phrases and the other two lawyers, well, I don't even want to talk about it, after what felt like the first ten sessions, they were only conspicuous by their absence. They then suddenly reappeared for the big "tribunal" after Reiner Füllmich was excluded.

The second reason why the defendant would never embezzle money is that this makes him vulnerable and gives his opponents, of whom he has quite a few, the opportunity to put him in prison in the worst case. Just as has happened now. And as was the plan. Because nobody can tell me that it's a coincidence that this case is now being heard in criminal court, where it doesn't belong at all, even if the crime had actually been committed. Nor can anyone tell me that it is common practice to transport a man accused of failing to repay a contractually secured loan on time, with his arms twisted and shackled and handcuffed, from a maximum security prison to a court where he has to wait for hours in a barren cell for his trial. The close-ups of his handcuffed hands simply fit in too well with the defamatory reports that were shown on television.

We all know: There are conspiracies, there is collusion among the powerful, there always has been and there always will be, all over the world. And they are by no means the ridiculous fantasy of a few unworldly theorists, even if people are trying to hammer this idea into people's heads today. Why else would Ursula von der Leyen not want the text messages she exchanged with Pfizer to be published?

Recognizing that there really is such a thing as conspiracies is a first step on the way to a better future. Let's continue to work on this realization. This trial, which I am now attending, will certainly shed further light. Because here, with these revelations, the disinfecting sunlight that Viviane Fischer spoke of back then, when this whole story began, is really needed.

Posted February 17, 2024