The LG Görlitz in the rejection of case against RIAG Ronsdorf, AG Zittau, its decision maintained. It had - remember - rejected the opposition on the grounds that "the rejection request from 11.05.2009 " to support to operations "with those already rejected earlier requests, most recently, the 12.12.2007, reasons "were . That was proven untrue. In rejecting the petition had been filed two complaints, which until 13 or have occurred, 14.12.2007, could be so utterly content of a petition was rejected on 12.12.2007. On this error, we had noted in our remonstrance - The LG Görlitz (Vice President of LG Becker and Judge at the LG Bohner and shrubs) but sees "no reason for the decision to change from 02.09.2009" !
create Like it? First of all this: One of the tasks that on 13 14:12:07 or occurred, they explain: "A possible timely rejection of application was not filed in the continuation date on 14.12.2007." This must know now that it was the same chamber of the LG Görlitz, in the same occupation, which still 02:09:09 the rejection of the rejection, even inadmissible by Ronsdorf because "delay" for said: "Outside of the trial is the refusal of a judge without a time limit allowed, as long as the decision is not adopted" . Now, if the sentence in the new decision, "was possible timely rejection of application not found ..." that a , be intended to include any legally relevant statement, then this means nothing else than that the LG Görlitz now contradicts himself and the Grounds for refusal but "not in time of valuation.
This is their refusal to be broken down as follows failure: First, the challenged judge rejects the rejection itself as inadmissible because late. Then to the complaint also points to the court rejects the rejection on the grounds: although not late - is it not out of the trial, but consumed. The remonstrance then points out that "used" right from the time sequence can not be - says the LG: Well, then stop not consumed, but then stop: late! Wow ...
One must also next to the statement itself - ". A possible timely application is rejected in the continuation date on 14.12.2007 has not been called" - melt in your mouth can. Since, then says to the court a defendant, the on 14.12.07 at the beginning of the trial suddenly the defenders are torn and granted the following also no suspension or even break for a few minutes: Well, my defendant, since haste does not respond professionally enough, as would have formulated times during your hearing a rejection request formally rigor have, up to your conviction was at least another 20 minutes! - Cool. So you have finally fitted be ...
the rest of them do so: "In the previous activities worthy of the judge as such is therefore not a valid reason for objecting regularly to be supported ...." - which has, however, no one ever says: It was never therefore, that Ronsdorf had already become active in the matter, but as he worked on the matter. And again, according to the court: "as the plaintiff held to be incorrect decisions of the judge at the trial shall not feel close to the arbitrariness." No, sure to remove the defense and the accused, shall not be interrupted, of course not arbitrary. Perhaps the behavior of the judge rather be awarded a medal for "special and previously considered impossible achievements in the creative application of the Code of Criminal Procedure" !? And a rejection of his person even to dismiss under prohibited entry into the merits test - do to so as a judge in their own right - also this: develop a behavior in which the "reasonable defendant" may feel no emotion, "mistrust in the impartiality of the judge" .. .
We ask ourselves about the "human image of the Basic Law" has been rants so much, but - what is actually the "humanity of the Criminal Procedure Code" from ...?!
0 comments:
Post a Comment