UPDATE. DAY 10, Part 3 - final part - of Reiner Fuellmich's trial. The questioning of Antonia Fischer.

Yesterday, a major move by Reiner and his legal team. Today, Antonia Fischer is questioned. Here are the links to the first part of the day and to the second part.

Now, Part 3. More of Antonia Fischer. Here is Reiner’s final question to her:

"Did you seriously believe that you would deprive me of my house and my assets and put me in jail and I would still give you the ranch?"

Here is the full Part 3.

Wε αrε Grεεκ - what's your Superpower ?, [03.04.2024]

Getting tight

Part 6

It can be noted that Antonia Fischer unequivocally confirmed that the settlement negotiations were faked by her and Hoffman's side and served the sole purpose of putting Reiner Füllmich in prison. Füllmich emphasized that this had happened because of their actions.

Fischer replied cheekily: "No, because of your actions and that is now the consequence."

In the course of the questioning, serious issues arose: it emerged that Prof. Martin Schwab had frequently helped the port lawyers pro bono. In return, they would put the letters on their letterhead in the event of audit challenges and then sell this as their advice. Martin had always worked pro bono.

She was finally asked directly whether their financial situation had been so tight at the time when they themselves stated in their Telegram channel that they were not available at the moment and that their work was on hold.

In response, Fischer claimed that this information was not theirs, that it had been entered there by a legal advice association. But it was on their Telegram channel, Füllmich clarified. According to Fischer, she was not in charge of it.

One could get the impression that Fischer and Hoffmann were in financial difficulties. Füllmich followed up: "Did you send your bills for travel and hotel costs to Martin, asking him to pay them, even though he did all the work for you pro bono?” Fischer visibly blushed and explained that she couldn't be stuck with the travel and hotel costs.

She added to her justification that Justus Hoffmann had also worked for Martin.

Füllmich pointed out that this was part of the university and had nothing to do with the law firm.

@wearegreeekja

The lawyer

Part 7

The search of Marcel Templin's law firm was discussed. He was briefly investigated on suspicion of breaching his duty of confidentiality and leaking internal information to the press. https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/mensch-metropole/nach-der-abgeordnetenhaus- wiederholungswahl-in-polizei-durchsucht-buero-von-berliner-rechtsanwalt-li.321533

In this context, the connection between Marcel Templin and Marcel Luthe became public in that Templin represented Luthe as a lawyer.

The question to Antonia Fischer was whether Marcel Luthe could have influenced Marcel Templin as a result.

During questioning, she merely stated that she thought yesterday's dossier was wrong. Someone had just written something, it didn't just fall out of the sky.

Had she spoken to Luthe? Fischer said yes, she had spoken to Luthe yesterday and he also said that the dossier was wrong.

But his name doesn't appear in it, replies Füllmich, so why does he think it's wrong? "Or does he think it's wrong that he's involved?"

Does she, Antonia Fischer, think it's wrong or that Luthe has nothing to do with it?

Fischer dodges the question and explains that she thinks Luthe is a good person and doesn't believe that he was sent to them on purpose.

"Do you think what Dr. Miseré said yesterday is wrong?" asks attorney Wörmer. She receives no answer.

She would have noticed if someone had been smuggled in, Fischer adds firmly.

Had she spoken to Marcel Templin? Fischer replies in the negative.

"Will they still do that?"

"Yes, definitely, when I see him again," says Fischer noncommittally.

@wearegreeekja

The lawyer

Part 8

The store of value was discussed. How did she come to the conclusion that Füllmich had built a pool with the money?

Fischer replied that this was stated in the public prosecutor's press release.

Füllmich asked whether she seriously believed that he had put himself on the line for 700,000 euros in order to later be seen as a fraudster as the international face of the committee?

Or whether it wasn't safer to protect the money, in the emergency situation they were in, from government access and put it in a secure investment and whether she knew that real estate and gold were the safest stores of value?

You couldn't have sold a house like that so quickly, she interjected.

"On 2.9.2022, the day of the criminal complaint, you knew from the email I wrote on 26.08.22 and sent to all of you that the house was on sale and that it would take a maximum of one week and that we were expecting 1.3 million, of which 1.34 million euros ultimately came out. You knew that," said Füllmich.

What sense does it make to encumber a house that is being sold with a mortgage? Where did they even get the information from?

From Viviane Fischer, according to Antonia Fischer.

Was Viviane Fischer's information checked? Antonia Fischer answered in the negative.

Was the criminal complaint discussed with Marcel Luthe?

At some point, yes, but she no longer knew when.

Attorney Wörmer: "Did you talk to Marcel Luthe about the Reiner Füllmich case?"

Yes, they talked about problems.

Füllmich: "What business did Marcel Luthe have with our problems?"

Fischer: "You just talk to friends or acquaintances."

Füllmich wants to know: "Friend or acquaintance?" Fischer described Marcel Lüthe as a friend.

Füllmich asked whether she still thought the dossier was a fake.

@wearegreeekja

Wε αrε Grεεκ - what's your superpower ?, [03.04.2024 18:43]

The patient

Part 9

At this point, the meeting was interrupted to deal with a letter concerning Justus Hoffmann's state of health. As the request was made yesterday that the Chamber should first be asked whether the public could be excluded or not, this had to be discussed. Fischer was asked whether she knew the details of this letter. Yes, she had skimmed it once.

The presiding judge gave everyone the opportunity to comment, which the defense accepted, with the request that the public attend.

The chamber decided that due to the protection of personal rights, the public should be excluded while the witness Antonia Fischer would be questioned on the subject of Dr. Justus Hoffman's state of health.

The defense asked whether an appeal could be lodged because they considered it important for the public, as this was a public criminal trial, which was ultimately also caused by Justus Hoffmann. And that it was important for the public to recognize from the excerpts of the dossier presented yesterday that if the work was done in this way and the dossier was not a forgery, it would become apparent that such people were being deliberately selected in order to control them.

The presiding judge refused because the personal rights of the witness Justus Hoffman would prevail.

After the exclusion of the public when it came to Justus Hoffman's state of health, the hearing continued.

@wearegreeekja

Wε αrε Grεεκ - what's your Superpower ?, [03.04.2024 19:03]

Not funny

Part 10

Katja Wörmer openly addressed the differences between the association "Eltern stehen aus e.V." and the port lawyers, namely that 25,000 euros were being demanded from the port lawyers. Antonia Fischer confirmed that there was a reminder notice from "Eltern stehen auf", but that the port lawyers had lodged an objection.

Fischer went on to say that the reminder notice also contained a file number, which would indicate that a lawsuit had been filed.

However, this had been around a year ago, but was still being negotiated and we would just have to wait, Fischer tried to play it down. As a layperson, you just wouldn't understand what the legal proceedings were like.

Wörmer followed up: There was a rumor that there were other disputes and that they amounted to 70,000 euros against the port lawyers. Fischer replied that this was just a rumor.

Füllmich took up the criminal complaint again with regard to the accusations against him of having made openly anti-Semitic statements. She now began to squirm visibly.

He wanted to know from her what anti-Semitic statements he was supposed to have made?

If then only slightly, said Fischer. She could no longer remember.

@wearegreeekja

Wε αrε Grεεεκ - what's your Superpower ?, [03.04.2024 19:10]

Well done

Part 11

He replied that this was listed in the criminal complaint she had signed.

Antonia Fischer begins to stammer.

"Do you even know which statements referred to what?"

She replied that he had been convicted. He corrected her that this was pending, as he had lodged an appeal.

Here, too, Fischer was outstanding in her ignorance and lack of knowledge that Füllmich had lodged an appeal against this verdict. When asked if she could explain what this accusation was about, she had no answer.

He explained that he had conducted an interview with Vera Scharav in which she, as a Holocaust survivor, reported that she was of the opinion that Hitler had not committed terrible crimes against people on his own, but that he had received financial help from Anglo-American finance.

Füllmich referred to this statement by Vera Scharav in an English interview and discussed it with an Israeli interviewee.

This interview was played in court to a translator who was specially brought to Göttingen. The translator said he was so nauseated by it, he couldn't translate it. As a result, Füllmich was sentenced. Did she know that?

No, she wouldn't have known.

Would she still have signed it if she had known all this?

She stammered, if it had been the reason and if... she was ultimately unable to give an answer. She assumed that Justus Hoffman would have had other accusations against him.

Füllmich: Would you have signed it?

The presiding judge intervened to say she did answer it - but from the perception of watching the trial, she still owes him the answer.

@wearegreeekja

Wε αrε Grεεεκ - what's your superpower ?, [03.04.2024 19:41]

One does not know

Part 12

What do they plan to do with the money if they get everything and there are no tax claims? "We'll park it in an escrow account and then we'll wait and see what the tax office says," says Fischer. Then they would use it for the purpose of the donation to do educational work.

They could start now, just like Viviane Fischer does, Füllmich suggested.

But we don't have any money, said Fischer.

Füllmich countered: "You do have the money, it's in Marcel Templin's account.
Or have you already spent it?"

Wörmer asks whether there are plans to continue working with Viviane Fischer?

Yes, we will sit down together and see how we can continue with the Corona Committee, says Fischer.

"But why did you then also remove Viviane Fischer as Managing Director?"
Füllmich added: "Don't YOU at least have a guilty conscience for stealing all the money from me, for not having a plan for projects for the donation purpose and for not having any tax debts so far?"

Fischer informs that you can't spend money that you don't have and that this may belong to the tax office.

Füllmich would like to know whether she assumes a tax liability of 100%.

Wörmer asks whether Fischer knew where the money managed by Marcel Templin had gone and whether he had an escrow account?

No, she didn't know that either.

Does she know whether and how it was used by Templin?

No, she did not know that.

@wearegreeekja

Wε αrε Grεεεκ - what's your superpower ?, [03.04.2024 19:49]

The important thing is to never stop asking

Part 13

Did Antonia Fischer ever talk to Marcel Templin or Justus Hoffman about what happened to the money from the house sale?

Yes, they would have paid taxes on it first.

Füllmich asked incredulously: "Excuse me? There's class action money in there! You paid tax on the money from the class action lawsuit?"

He would have to ask Marcel Templin, said Fischer, the money was with him for the time being.

What does that mean?

She couldn't answer that either. Whether the money was returned to the committee from the money received?

Why were you there at the notary appointment?

We were friends, had client appointments and simply went along, according to the explanation of a busy lawyer.

Was she still in contact with the public prosecutor's office? Fischer says no.

In the latest version of a settlement, Hoffmann and Fischer had offered to withdraw the adhesion if the money was forthcoming.

Füllmich asks, visibly horrified: "Did you seriously believe that you would deprive me of my house and my assets and put me in jail and I would still give you the ranch?"

The witness Antonia Fischer is released unsworn.

@wearegreeekja

_________________________________

The current remaining court dates - 6 in total:

• Friday, 19.04.2024 Start: 09.15 a.m.

• Wednesday, 24.04.2024 Start: 09.15 a.m.

• 4 more added, ending approximately May 15

_________________________________

Here is the address to write to Reiner:

LETTERS;
JVA Rosdorf
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Am Grossen Sieke 8
37124 Rosdorf
Germany

• postcards and cards allowed,

• no glitter on the envelops,

• no stamps or money in the envelops,

• no books or other objects - not permitted,

• nothing to be mentioned about the case,

• put your name of each page of the letter - letters are taken out of the envelops.

_________________________________

TO DONATE:
To donate, here is the link for donations for legal and other expenses: https://www.givesendgo.com/GBBX2

Posted March 19, 2024