Even though we have two active law suits in the courts in
the U.S., the German judge, in charge of reading Ernst's mail, has ruled
that Ernst is not entitled to uncensored, confidential correspondence with
our immigration attorney, stating that what was happening in the U.S. and
Canada were merely "administrative" proceedings. Odd, though, that
"administrative" proceedings could justify a political kidnapping,
two years of brutal and humiliating confinement in an isolation cell, and a
20 year ban on returning to the U.S., in effect ending our marriage - unless
we find a way to let sanity and justice return to this case!
I was in court on the 16th of August, which meant waking
up at 5:30 a.m. to get ready for the guards who come punctually every
morning at 6:00 a.m. to open the door to make a visual check of each cell
to see if a prisoner is alive or did himself in during the night.
With me, it's easy - they can see at once that I am alive.
I greet them at my cell door, envelopes ready for the censors or the
lawyers, or a requisition for the staff in hand for pail and broom to
clean my cell, sometimes an order for those lovely CDs of uplifting
classical and religious music.
The young guard surprised me with a warm smile and asked
me very politely: "Would you like to take a shower before
court?" I had written another letter to you, thinking it would lift
your spirits and hoping to produce something of use and value while I was
still allowed to write and had a real pen, even a fountain pen - such
luxury! I had only turned the light off shortly after 2:00 a.m. so I was
grateful for the shower.
I will spare you the ride to court, painfully handcuffed
with my arms behind my back, and the over 3 hour wait in a windowless
holding cell, until I was finally led into a huge courtroom which looked
like a conference center meeting room or a food court in one of America's
more ritzy shopping centers, with white plastic chairs and light blue
upholstery. I have never been in any courtroom in any country anywhere
that looked like that! There was no German flag, and where in America the
US flag and heraldic bird is always present in blue-white, gold-embossed
carving, looking very dignified and stately, here the wall behind the
judge's elevated seats was graced by a stark flat-iron in black matte deer
with antlers of Baden-Würthemberg. I could not believe it!
One solitary young judge, appr. 45-50 years old, with a
secretary, was sitting slightly elevated, talking to my attorney, Jürgen
Rieger. I thought that Rieger was in Sweden on holidays - I had expected
attorney Sylvia Stolz alone, who was delayed by 20 minutes by an accident
on the Autobahn. I was brought up from my cell, 15 minutes late. Jürgen
was already talking about the Power of Attorney for Bruce, [our American
immigration attorney], and it was dealt with and cleared up. He does not
have to worry. He cannot use the Power of Attorney here, so he can stop
worrying about responsibilities, translations etc. It was a revealing
exercise. Neither of my attorneys understood what Judge M. cleared up very
quickly in an earlier letter - that I was not involved in criminal trials
in Canada or the USA but administrative proceedings, which were not
covered by a privilege protecting client-attorney relationships
The mail matter came up - that there were boxes of unread
letters at the court, and what to do with it. They simply did not have the
manpower or time to deal with it, etc. In the end it was decided that
whatever was not allowed to be given to me, Jürgen would get. He would go
through it whenever he had a few hours - at least the important documents,
books, etc. which could be useful to the defense rather than accumulating
in the basement of the court or prison.
I had to give Jürgen permission, noted in the court
record, to read and to store this excessive mail. Amazing, Ingrid, what
consternation that flow of mail has caused in Canada and in Germany! I
always thought that everybody got that much mail. Apparently it seems to
be a lot for most people. Live and learn!
A few more technical details were dealt with, like the
request by Judge M. about adding one more duty counsel, called
Pflichtverteidiger, which both the lawyers declared as highly irregular -
unheard-of in a case where there are already two defense attorneys paid by
us. It seems that a tentative understanding between Rieger, Scholz and the
judge was reached, and I will write to the judge tonight to summarize the
feeling by both lawyers, offering Frau Stolz as duty counsel, which means
I cannot fire her until the trial is over. That's what they seemed afraid
of - that I would fire her, or Jürgen, or both - or that they would walk
out on me because of the tricky legal situation. They must have some
weird, erroneous, maybe media-generated, distorted view of me. Weird,
Ingrid! All weird stuff, with an air of unreality about it all. If it were
not so far-reaching in its consequences, one could almost find it amusing.
The whole thing lasted maybe 35 minutes.
Then the lawyers asked me, the judge, and the court staff
if they could talk to me in my cell, which was mercifully permitted. Hours
were spent in that narrow, stuffy cell, with a hard wooden bench for
Jürgen, bolted to the floor, I leaning against the wall, Sylvia sitting
in a chair - upholstered, no less! - brought in by the guards for her.
Nothing to eat, nothing to drink, and no toilet pit stop. There was of
course a toilet in the cell, but naturally, everybody politely refused to
use it.
By the end of the afternoon, we had pretty well arrived at
an understanding, divisions of work and responsibilities - and Jürgen,
who has over 30 years experience as a defense attorney [Strafverteidiger,
literal translation in German: punishment attorney] walked me through the
differences between Anglo-Saxon legal traditions and what they have
evolved and adopted here since Germany's defeat in 1945.
Ingrid, Bruce discerned that at once when he pointed out
the odd role of the judge in these proceedings. In Anglo-Saxon legal
proceedings, we have an adversarial system. Prosecution and defense appear
before a Solomonic judge who rarely interferes in the proceedings, and a
jury that can overrule a judge. Not here! Here the judges investigate and
try a case. They do most of the questioning and researching, assisted by
the prosecutor. Judges have virtually unchecked powers. There really are
no verifications possible because there are no verbatim court transcripts
to reveal what was said, claimed, stated by whom - which leaves the doors
wide open for quoting someone in a distorted, totally false way - with
emphasis on one thing by the defense, another by the prosecution, and a
third by the judge. Imagine that!
Since there are no transcripts to go back to, guess whose
views and recollections usually win out? It's a foregone conclusion.
I was absolutely shocked also by the role of witnesses and
the latitude given them, and by the place of the accused in all this. What
a system! Unbelievable!
Ingrid, believe me - I was a lucky man, and the Germans
ought to be eternally grateful to me, that I subjected myself to these
grueling trials - to have every word, every document, every nuance
recorded by a neutral court stenographer. It really is a bequest I will
leave to history which ceased to be in Germany when they changed their
system away from what was almost a British system with transcripts and
nine instead of 12 jury members in the 1960s and 1970s.
[END]
