For your information, Justice Minister Maas: To suppress free speech Germany's courts are rigged and deliberately break laws. You did not know this?

Case 1 (of 3 - all brought on by German labor agencies infringing my right to free speech)

cc Labor Min. Nahles

Dear Justice Minister Maas,

Free speech is a fickle thing. Better to get rid of it when coming from a blogger. German style. ORDNUNG! Roland-Freisler-like.

Contravenes German law, because posted by blogger.

Does NOT contravene law,
bcs posted by newspaper

As a lawyer you are most certainly familiar with Section 243 of the STPO.
In a telephone conversation immediately after the inspection of the case files, my former court appointed lawyer and crook Aglaia Muth informed me accordingly: 'I have spoken to Judge Grain and I must say I tend towards him.' (That the Merkel Nazi caricature was contrary to § 86 a STGB.) So there was a pretrial conversation between the judge and "my" lawyer!

However, this is not mentioned in the protocol of the court hearing and neither did Judge Grain make any reference during the court hearing if any conversations had taken place. This is a breach of law as Section 243 of the STPO Paragraph 4 reads as follows:

(4) The chairman shall state whether discussions have taken place pursuant to §§ 202a, 212 if the object of the meeting was the possibility of an understanding (§ 257c), and if so, its essential content.

I can not prove this phone conversation but the fact that the Munich court and my court appointed lawyer and crook Aglaia Muth to this day (for more than 4 years) have refused to release the 19-page letter of the blackmailer Manfred Jäger, presently the chief of the Labor Agency Ingolstadt, leaves a very bad taste because said letter is the SMOKING GUN !!!

Enter a very recent decision of the BUNDESGERICHTSHOFS 1 StR 622/16 of 21 March 2017:

12 2. There is a breach of the obligation to provide information under section 243 para. 4 sentence 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(A) According to this provision, the chairman, after reading the sentence of the prosecution and before the defendant 's instruction and interrogation, has to state whether discussions have taken place pursuant to Sections 202a, 212 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the subject matter was the possibility of an agreement (§ 257c of the Code of Criminal Procedure) If so, their essential content. The obligation to provide information under Section 243 (4) sentence 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applies to all preliminary hearings aimed at reaching an agreement (see BGH, judgment of 13 February 2014 - 1 StR 423/13, NStZ 2014, 217 mwN).

...

16 a) In the event of breaches of the obligation to provide information under Section 243 (4) Sentence 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is regularly assumed that the judgment is based on this infringement; Except in exceptional cases (see only BGH, judgment of 13 February 2014 - 1 StR 423/13, NStZ 2014, 217 mwN). As the Federal Constitutional Court pointed out in detail in its judgment of 19 March 2013 - 2 BvR 2628/10 (NJW 2013, 1058, 1065), the legislature considers it possible to reach an agreement only if the comprehensive transparency and documentation obligations are observed (BVerfG, judgment of 19 March 2013 - 2 BvR 2628/10, NJW 2013, 1058, 1066) is an inseparable unit of authorization and restriction of understandings while at the same time being subject to notification, instruction and documentation obligations. As a result, any violation of such legal provisions will "mash" the communication as a whole and thus lead to the unlawfulness of the communication.

This conscious omission by the judge is no surprise insofar as he had already insinuated in a prior letter to me that I could be submitted to a Mental Health Assessment and that admitting my guilt could have positive effects. Free speech has to be suppressed. If that involves breaking laws, why would a German judge and a colluding lawyer care?

May I quote one of your former countrymen? The one with the weird hairdo. “I shall not rest until every German sees that it is a shameful thing to be a lawyer.” Not necessary these days as some German lawyers do not feel any shame, or as one lawyer from the US wrote to me in an email "many German lawyers are assholes".

Justice Minister of Germany, you Germans have it all figured out, right? Figured out, based on your proud Nazi past that keeps on living and thriving clandestinely - ecologically sanitized by your section 86 STGB - and subtly garnished with a healthy dose of social class-based court decisions, according to which any sort of critique of your inhuman neoliberal Hartz concept must be vigorously suppressed. Need I add that I am pressing for a retrial with criminal Manfred Jäger as witness for questioning?

Care to hear about yet another case involving the breach of law? You came to the right place in rotten Bavaria with a letter about Case 2 in about a week. This time sprinkled with a pinch of racism. Would not be Germany without it, would it Minister? Who is involved? One of your social-fascist Jobcenters.

I reiterate firmly: No German infringes my right to freedom of expression!

As always best regards,