Icon: enlarge
Walter Lübcke's son and widow (front row, 1st and 2nd from right) in the process: "Clarity as to whether and how H. was involved in the act"
Photo: Thomas Lohnes / dpa
On Thursday the 5th criminal senate of the Higher Regional Court Frankfurt am Main wants to negotiate for the 31st time in the case of Walter Lübcke.
From the beginning, there were moments in the trial against the alleged murderer Stephan Ernst and his alleged helper Markus H. when it seemed as if the judges wanted to make short work of it.
In these situations, chairman Thomas Sagebiel raised his voice, slid around in his Senate chair or interrupted other parties involved in the process.
This was most recently the case on Tuesday, when he let the Lübcke family's lawyer know not to take seriously the application that he had presented to the court that morning.
Attorney Holger Matt wanted to request that an email be read out that Ernst's previous defense attorney had sent the family spokesman.
He also applied for documents from the former defense attorney's possession to be confiscated.
Judge Sagebiel said it was not intended to read this email, summon the defense attorney or do anything else.
"We think that's just superfluous," he rumbled.
"We won't do anything about it."
Will the verdict be announced in December?
Matt submitted his application anyway and was backed by the representative of the Federal Prosecutor's Office, Chief Public Prosecutor Dieter Killmer, and the current defense attorney, Stephan Ernst, Mustafa Kaplan.
Both have - like the family - an interest in leaving no stone unturned to prove that Markus H. was an accessory to murder.
After the Senate has overturned the arrest warrant against H., his acquittal on this point is no longer unlikely.
On the 24th day of the hearing, at the end of October, the Senate announced that it would close the taking of evidence on November 19.
He planned the pleadings for November 24th and 26th, the judgment for December 1st.
Sagebiel's appeals to adhere to the tight schedule caused a lack of understanding and were taken as evidence that H.'s role in court should not be examined in more detail.
For the main defendant Ernst as well as for the relatives of Walter Lübcke it would be a catastrophe.
Ernst claims that H. incited him to murder.
The Attorney General evaluates H's involvement as psychological aid.
The family sees him as an accomplice, as the second man on the scene, as the last person to look Walter Lübcke in the eyes on June 1, 2019 shortly before his death.
"Clarity as to whether and how H. was involved in the act"
Now judge Sagebiel asked those involved in the process to suggest further dates.
It sounds like the process is going to be extended.
Will the Senate approve the motions of the defense and the family?
It would be a relief for the family, says their spokesman Dirk Metz.
“And clarity as to whether and how H. was involved in the act.
Clarity also about the last few seconds in the life of the husband and father. "
Ernst's defender Frank Hannig, who has since been fired, is said to have recorded conversations with Ernst in custody.
In it Ernst is said to have described to him - as with his confession in court - that H. was at the scene.
Are these recordings played in the courtroom?
If Ernst relieved Hannig of his obligation to secrecy, these recordings could "of course bring about further clarification, after all, they are recordings of a confidential defense counsel", says joint prosecutor Alexander Hoffmann.
He represents Ahmed I in the proceedings, whom Ernst allegedly attacked with a knife in 2016.
"In such conversations, honest information is often given, because it doesn't make much sense to lie to your own defense attorney."
Should it turn out, however, that such records do not even exist, the credibility of Ernst and his defense lawyer Kaplan would be "finally destroyed," says Hoffmann.
For Ahmed I, too, it is essential to check Ernst's credibility, as he denies the attack on the Iraqi.
Damage to credibility
Defense attorney Kaplan remains: The killing of Walter Lübcke "happened exactly" as Ernst described it in the court;
Markus H. was with Ernst at the scene.
"My client is aware that his credibility has been scratched by the false versions of the offense that he previously presented - on the advice of his defense counsel at the time," said Kaplan.
Ernst said the Lübcke family would learn the truth.
He did this in court.
"If the transcripts in the hand file of attorney Hannig were properly recorded and not subsequently fudged for irrelevant considerations, this will show that my client told the truth in the main hearing."
Icon: enlarge
Should be called as a witness: Suspended prison officer Daniel Zabel with his lawyer Frank Hannig (archive picture)
Photo: Christian Essler / imago images / xcitepress
This will also be confirmed by Daniel Zabel, says Kaplan, whom he wants to question as a witness in the court.
Zabel had reconstructed the course of the crime on site on Hannig's order.
Zabel is considered a close confidante of Hannig, he became famous as the judicial officer who, after Daniel Hillig's death in Chemnitz, had distributed the arrest warrant for a provisionally arrested Iraqi.
In the meantime, Zabel has made a career with the Saxon AfD: In the local elections in the spring, he stood up in Dresden and is now a member of the Saxon state board.
Investigations are still ongoing against the 41-year-old on suspicion of bodily harm in office: As a prison officer, Zabel is said to have hit and kicked an imprisoned Tunisian who was tied up.
On Thursday, the report of the psychiatric expert Norbert Leygraf will first be heard in the Lübcke proceedings.
Icon: The mirror
