Yesterday, a major move by Reiner and his legal team. Today, Antonia Fischer is questioned. Here is the link to the first part of the day. Now, Part 2. More of Antonia Fischer, very direct about her actions being prompted by her desire to see Reiner arrested (the directness coming perhaps in response to the
Thank you again Elsa, I've now caught up with the trial.
I've been following Reiner Fuellmich since more or less the start of the plandemic, he kept my spirits high along with a few other brave souls whom I gradually came across in the last four years, you included!
What a bunch of shysters, are these people with whom this poor man has had to deal, but as with the Nazis who kept a record of their misdemeanours, these people have also dug their own graves.
Yes, but I don't have that info. If I get it, I will definitely post it. I am sure someone in Germany has done the research. But no one I know has sent to me.
I too find it hard to understand on what good faith legal basis Reiner is still being held.
If there is such a basis I think it lies in the judge's reported replies to Reiner at the end of day 8, after Reiner had asked the judge what could still be at issue :
<blockquote><i>Füllmich noted that it was now clear that this was an openly agreed loan that was neither in breach of the articles of association, nor was its use stipulated or otherwise prescribed in the loan agreement
According to the judge, there are also other legal opinions that still need to be considered, as do the loan agreements.
Füllmich wondered what other opinions there were. After all, everything had been contractually agreed and openly disclosed.
It could also have been a fiduciary custody, the chairman remarks and ends the meeting with the statement that an initial legal opinion would be read out by the chamber on the next day of the hearing (2.4.2024, note).</I></blockquote>
The judge did not give a straight answer then and, from the reports we have read since, has still not given his promised 'legal opinion'. Maybe we have missed something, but otherwise the judge seems to be prevaricating.
Thank you again Elsa, I've now caught up with the trial.
I've been following Reiner Fuellmich since more or less the start of the plandemic, he kept my spirits high along with a few other brave souls whom I gradually came across in the last four years, you included!
What a bunch of shysters, are these people with whom this poor man has had to deal, but as with the Nazis who kept a record of their misdemeanours, these people have also dug their own graves.
What is known about the judges and their connections? Seems important, no?
Yes, but I don't have that info. If I get it, I will definitely post it. I am sure someone in Germany has done the research. But no one I know has sent to me.
It becomes clear , this plot against Reiner is now on full view . I wonder how time the juges can extend this theatre .
in Canada QC. the C19 nightmare is well laidout in this report that nobody wants to digest. Only 1 person would , is name is Reiner:
https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/commissioners-report/
=====
Maybe this will help Reiner - German Goverment Admits There Was No Pandemic - https://tinyurl.com/4pdku7my
I too find it hard to understand on what good faith legal basis Reiner is still being held.
If there is such a basis I think it lies in the judge's reported replies to Reiner at the end of day 8, after Reiner had asked the judge what could still be at issue :
https://truthsummit.substack.com/p/update-part-2-of-day-8-of-reiner-fuellmich-trial
<blockquote><i>Füllmich noted that it was now clear that this was an openly agreed loan that was neither in breach of the articles of association, nor was its use stipulated or otherwise prescribed in the loan agreement
According to the judge, there are also other legal opinions that still need to be considered, as do the loan agreements.
Füllmich wondered what other opinions there were. After all, everything had been contractually agreed and openly disclosed.
It could also have been a fiduciary custody, the chairman remarks and ends the meeting with the statement that an initial legal opinion would be read out by the chamber on the next day of the hearing (2.4.2024, note).</I></blockquote>
The judge did not give a straight answer then and, from the reports we have read since, has still not given his promised 'legal opinion'. Maybe we have missed something, but otherwise the judge seems to be prevaricating.
I do not believe you have missed anything.
Courts are corrupt everywhere. Look at the J6 innocent who are behind bars for insurrection
Sorry. I don't understand your comment. Courts are corrupted by global forces.