LG rejection rejects as "consumed" - mistake or a lie? The LG Görlitz has "consumed" the complaint in the rejection of case against judge Ronsdorf (AG Zittau) as
discarded.
"true" , according to the court,
"the district court wrongly rejected the application for review out of time. Outside of the trial, the refusal of a judge without a time limit is allowed as long as the decision is not adopted." - exactly our (but also trivial) argument
. However, so does the LG still got to reject the complaint, support the rejection
"on operations that have already rejected earlier petitions, were the last of 12.12.2007 justified." is now, to put it cautiously, not true. This is also easy to determine: The site in question
rejection letter three grounds for claims of which the two 13th or have occurred 14.12.2007 - these can hardly be already to have been raised in other rejections 12/12/2007 ... That are next to the third reason hardly consumed as expected, since the then arbitrarily reject the judge concerned himself as "inadmissible" discarded was - quite a gift.
Now we are dealing for years with RIAG Ronsdorf in this case, who has distinguished himself time and again by refusing to Andrew as the victim in the criminal procedure rights to make arbitrary decisions, etc. pp. The fact that this judge nevertheless remains the case is active, was previously due to the fact that the College at Zittau AG Ronsdorf "kept back" and the recent rejections of some absurd and rejected in part, without notice (to put forward allegations). Then we finally come
even in this case in the next instance - and they simply invent facts in order to turn the honorable Lord, not from the process need to take?
Now this may be have been a mistake. Whilst not quite explicable, and not really excusable - but we want first of all take in our infinite good nature the best. So before we interpret this decision as the law, we assume a training bliss and have the chamber (Vice President Becker and Judge at the LG shrub and floor) granted by
remonstrance the possibility of correction.
same time, we have now at least because of the arbitrary rejection of a second rejection as "inadmissible" by the rejected ones (Ronsdorf) this self again (for safety reasons) rejected
(Ronsdorf initially had rejected a rejection
on 13.12.07 because of "over", said he then checked black to white and the merits (p. 11 below), as permitted under any circumstances, he now had on
6.26 .09 because of "delay" discarded, but which it does not exist outside the trial). It was expected that further rejection be unnecessary because the district court to the opposite idea out of this shameful game at last to end one. But who knows - so a really secure feeling that the decision of the facts, inventing LG Görlitz just a "mistake" was that we somehow now after several years in this process, where it has not arbitrary, and - again expressed caution - errors of law is replete, strangely enough, no more ...
