germany – Page 3

Health Minister Complaint Case

Health Minister Complaint Case

Re: the Legality of a Health Minister knowingly distributing False Information about a new Pharmacological Product regarding its safety & efficacy

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: Jan 16, 2023
Location: Berlin, Germany
Court: State Prosecutor /Staatsanwaltschaft Berlin
Case #: TBD
Plaintiff: Wilfried Schmitz
Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Wilfried Schmitz

Defendant: Health Minister Karl Lauterbach & others in Federal Health Ministry
Trial Type: Criminal Complaint
Judge: TBD
Status: complaint submitted
Verdict: TBD

*updated Jan 31, 2023

Background

This is a legal complaint [3] formulated and submitted by lawyer Wilfried Schmitz against:

Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach, Federal Minister of Health and all other employees of the Federal Ministry of Health who may still be involved in the crime. [3]

on suspicion of:

dangerous and grievous bodily harm (in office) resulting in death according to §§ 223, 224, 226, 227, 340 StGB,
manslaughter and murder according to §§ 212 and 211 StGB,
negligent bodily injury according to § 229 StGB,
involuntary manslaughter according to § 222 StGB,
all possible criminal offences according to §§ 95, 96 AMG,
all other possible criminal offences and forms of participation under the Criminal Code, the War Weapons Control Act, the International Criminal Code.

In essence, this complaint arose from action taken by German Dr. Weikl, vice chairman of Medical Workers and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy (MWGFD), following his interest in a similar complaint against the Swiss president Alain Berset (1). He then began to analyse the legal situation in Germany to establish whether a similar action could conceivably be taken against Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach [2]:

The ball was set rolling by an interview by Dr. Ronald Weikl with the Swiss investment banker Pascal Najadi. The Vice of the Medical Workers and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy (MWGFD) spoke with Najadi about his criminal charges against Federal Councillor Alain Berset, whose responsibilities in Bern include the Health Department. As a triple-vaccinated man, the banker feels he has been hoodwinked by Berset and his “false allegations on the Corona issue”.

The aspect of Swiss law used in the complaint against Alain Berset is not directly applicable in Germany: [2]

Unlike the Swiss Penal Code, the German equivalent does not know the offence of abuse of office in this form. A lawyer who was not named in the MWGFD press release therefore recommended to Dr. Weikl: “The only law that could be invoked is the Heilmittelwerbegesetz (HWG), which requires truthful information […] Or, in the interplay of the Infektionsschutzgesetz (IfSG) and the obligation to vaccinate (or the obligation to tolerate, as in the case of members of the armed forces, for example), possibly the offence of ‘coercion in office’ Paragraph 240….”.

The lawyer Wilfried Schmitz, however, saw in this statement: [2]

a “grossly false” and “extremely trivialising representation” and felt it was clearly “too lax”, which is why he addressed Dr. Weikl directly with an email in which he wrote: [2]
“…If a health minister deceives the entire public, in particular by deliberately misstating that Covid-19 injections are ‘free of side effects’, contrary to his legal duties, then the most serious criminal offences such as murder must also be examined here, in particular (i.e. not only) the murder characteristic of insidiousness. Furthermore, criminal offences under the AMG (Medicines Act): Finally, in this context, at least (!) the aiding and abetting of the serious criminal offences of third parties, which were supported or made possible by such public false allegations, would have to be examined. His statement that the Covid-19 injections were also ‘highly effective’ was – as has long been proven – of course also deliberately false. But with the lie of no side effects, it is even easier to prove. For your information, I am enclosing my criminal complaint against those responsible at the PEI, etc. I assume that your association will inform visitors to its homepage more accurately in future. For you should not give the impression of wanting to divert attention from the true criminal guilt of those primarily responsible for the administration of the Covid-19 injections. A half-truth that distracts from the whole truth is a whole lie!“

Lawyer Wilfried Schmitz formulated & submitted the complaint against Lauterbach [3].

Significance

First Corona Case in Germany accusing a Health Minister of criminal intent to cause harm

Plaintiff’s Argument

To justify his accusations, the lawyer first refers to a Youtube video in which several experts comment on a complaint filed in Switzerland against Swissmedic and explain the context from a professional point of view. [2] [3]

For an introduction to the facts that gave rise to this criminal complaint, I recommend the YouTube video entitled “Media conference: Criminal complaint against Swissmedic”, available under the link
From this video you will already be able to gather a whole series of highly qualified experts who would certainly not refuse to give expert advice to your authority, in particular:
Dr. Michael Palmer on the special mode of action of mRNA injections,
Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen on the (lack of) effectiveness of these injections,
Prof. Dr. Dr. Martin Haditsch on the risks of mRNA injections,
Prof. Dr. Konstantin Beck on the risk to public health from these Covid 19 injections (excess mortality etc.).

Lawyer Schmitz goes on to argue: [3]

the full text of the criminal complaint filed by the Swiss lawyers Kruse Law on 14.7.2022, which will adequately inform you that and – at the latest – from when and why (also) the responsible persons of the PEI and thus the defendants here had to be positively aware that these Covid-19 injections are questionable medicinal products in the sense of § 5 AMG, so that they were obliged by virtue of their legal competence to prevent these medicinal products – ever and further – from entering the market and being used on humans.
The prerequisites for a conditional authorisation never existed, and this was evident from the very beginning, so that from a point in time yet to be determined, the defendants would also have been aware of it.

Furthermore: [3]

You will certainly remember that the accused Federal Minister of Health, Prof. Dr. Karl Lauterbach, never tired of publicly emphasising at every possible opportunity that the Covid-19 vaccines were very or highly effective and, in particular, “free of side effects”.
He of all people had to know better from the very beginning, so that his misleading statements in any case already justify criminal liability according to § 95 para. 1 nos. 1 and 3 a AMG.

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

Decision

TBD

Aftermath

…More information is needed…

Further Research

Court Documents:

Original Criminal Complaint Document (Deutsch)

In the news:

Media

Media Conference Against SwissMedic -Nov 14 2022

source: Odysee/ longXXvids

MUST WATCH: C19 Death Data Analysis for Every Country pre & post mRNA -Jan 12 2022

source: Odysee/ yabba

Germany Vaccination Consequences -Dec 12 2022

source: Odysee/ shortXXvids

Back to All Cases

Holocaust Survivor Mandate Case

Holocaust Survivor Jab Mandate Case

Re: the Legality of forcefully Injecting a Person with an alleged Medication Against their Will

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: Dec 14 2022
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Court: District Court of Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt
Case #:
Plaintiff: 85 yr old Holocaust Survivor
Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Holger Fischer

Defendant: Guardian
Trial Type:
Judge: Dr. L
Status: Under Appeal
Verdict: TBD

*updated Feb 14. 2023

Background

A court in the German city of Stuttgart, in the state of Baden-Württemberg, sought to force COVID-19 vaccinations for an 85-year-old Jewish composer and a Holocaust survivor. [1]….in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2]

The composer’s guardian had been trying to institutionalize his charge for years because she had once refused to take her medication. [2]

Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, comments that this suggests that there are financial interests at play, which also was observed by Report24. Orel published an open letter to the court, asking it to reconsider the order. [8]

Zhvanetskaya was born in 1937 in Vinnytsa, Ukraine, and moved to Germany in the late 1990s. She writes for various musical instruments, including contrabass, tuba, and trombone, and is a prolific composer, having authored two operas, more than twenty song cycles, symphonic works, and numerous sonatas. [8]

Issued December 2022, the order authorizes Zhvanetskaya’s guardian and medical support staff to force their way into her home, calling on police if needed, then lock her up in a psychiatric institution until December 2024 at the latest so that she can be administered two shots of the Covid-19 vaccine she has repeatedly insisted she does not want. [2]

According to the verdict of judge Dr. L. at the district court Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, the accommodation of the affected person in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital or a closed ward of a care facility was approved by the duty caregiver until December 5, 2024 at the latest. At the same time, two vaccinations against Covid-19 (Corona) for basic immunization were approved as compulsory medical measures, in each case after internal examination of the ability to vaccinate, until January 16, 2023 at the latest, with the consent of the duty caregiver. [7]

The court claims that Zhvanetskaya has been diagnosed with several mental illnesses, including frontotemporal dementia, “change of character,” delusional disorder, “narcissistic self-image,” egocentrism, and logorrhea. She also allegedly suffers from morbid obesity and cardiac issues. [8]

The judgment further states that the forced vaccination against Covid-19 against the will of the person concerned in the context of the accommodation was necessary for the welfare of the person concerned in order to avert an imminent significant damage to her health. [7]

Inna Zhvanetskaya had not been convinced of the necessity of this medical measure, on the contrary. She strictly rejected the vaccination. Therefore, the judge found that the substantial health damage could not be averted by any other measure reasonable for the person concerned, since the expected benefit of the medical measure would substantially outweigh the expected impairment of the person concerned. [7]

The non-consensual treatment is said to be justified by the composer’s alleged mental and physical illnesses, which the order claims include narcissism, egomania, logorrhea, dementia, obesity, heart disease, and an obsession with music. [2]

“She is completely caught up in her compositions and so busy with music that it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation with her,” the document states. [2]

The outlet Report24 posted a copy of the court order, which authorizes the woman’s transfer to a psychiatric ward and administering inoculations. According to the translation of the court documents done by Children’s Health Defense, if Zhvanetskaya or her guardians refuse to cooperate, the authorities should use force to make them: [8]

If the competent guardianship authority cooperates in the process of bringing the person concerned to [the] accommodation specified, it may, if necessary, use force and call in the assistance of the police enforcement authorities. [8]
The home of the person concerned may be forcibly opened, entered and searched for the purpose of carrying out the procedure. [8]
The immediate effectiveness of the decision is ordered. [8]

Attorney Holger Fischer got the case rolling. He reported about it in his Telegram channel, contacted Masha Orel, a co-founder of “We for Humanity”, who in turn contacted Report24. First, Report24 asked the court for an opinion on Sunday, January 8, 2023. This came on Monday and stated dryly and factually on what basis the deprivation of liberty measures as well as the compulsory medical treatment were ordered and that a complaint was pending (that of attorney Fischer). [7]

In the channel of attorney Holger Fischer one could read:

With me the year began among other things with a cry for help from Baden-Wuerttemberg: At the request of the duty caregiver, a guardianship court approved the two-year closed accommodation of an old lady, which means compulsory treatment in a psychiatric hospital, followed by admission to the protected area of a nursing home. Without first waiting for the success of the hospital treatment and then, for example, deciding the case anew by obtaining a new expert opinion regarding the need for further accommodation, a decision is immediately made here about the future of this not so dependent woman. [7]
This alone is not disproportionate. Besides, the court expressly approves the compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. [7]
While a forced medication with psychotropic drugs may only be ultima ratio, accordingly not already included in the decision, here a court decides that the affected person receives her Covid injection by force without hesitation, i.e. possibly still directly after her transfer by means of police coercion to the psychiatric hospital. (, with the use of force. ) [7]
All for the benefit of the person concerned in accordance with Section 1906 (1) (2) of the German Civil Code, according to which placement against the will of a person concerned is only permissible because “an examination of the state of health, a medical treatment or a medical intervention is necessary to avert imminent significant damage to health, the measure cannot be carried out without the placement of the person concerned, and the person concerned cannot recognize the necessity of the placement or act in accordance with this insight due to a mental illness or mental or psychological disability.” [7]
Since the order is immediately enforceable, she now waits daily to be removed from her home, transported to the psychiatric ward, and forcibly inoculated by the guardianship authority, which will assist the duty caregiver in carrying out the order, which in turn will call in the police to apply coercive measures. The person concerned was born before the beginning of the Second World War and is of Jewish origin. [7]
In the channel one finds also the first legal statement of him. Among other things one can read there: It is not yet certain how the fate of the old lady will continue, who is to be accommodated today. By the legal remedy of the complaint the decision of the guardianship court to the long-term accommodation and compulsory vaccination is contestable and was contested. The decision of the Appeals Board of the Regional Court is pending. [7]

Hiding & Video

Zhvanetskaya was reportedly rescued ahead of their visit by “friendly activists.” On January 10, 2023, 1n a video recorded from her hiding place, the composer told Report24 that “music is my life, and if they take away music from me then they take my life.” [2]

Zhvanetskaya’s acquaintances have countered that the video she made this week proves she is of sound mind and body. While admitting the composer was “introverted and autistic,” Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, told German outlet TKP after speaking to Zhvanetskaya that this was “normal for a highly talented artist” [2]

According to Report24, the “exclusive video shows: She is neither of unsound mind nor endangering herself or others. She’s just afraid for her life,” rendering the psychiatric admittance questionable. [1]

Public Reaction

Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [2]
Politicians and legal experts, including the ‘Alternative for Germany’ (AfD) party’s Martin Sich, have decried the court order against the composer as a violation of Germany’s Basic Law. [2]
German outlet TKP and the Society of Physicians and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy reported about lawyers, activists, and physicians defending Zhvanetskaya and criticizing the authorities for violating the Nuremberg Code, committing crimes against humanity by forcing an experimental drug on a person. [8]

Dr. med. Bodo Schiffmann also picked it up in his channel

“Holocaust survivor is to receive a compulsory medical measure twice tomorrow January 11, 2023: She is to be forcibly vaccinated against Covid-19 against her conscious decision. Furthermore, she is to be forcibly committed to a psychiatric institution. There she is to be vaccinated twice against COVID-19. The woman has consciously decided against this vaccination and is now being subjected to a compulsory medical measure as a Holocaust survivor in Germany.” and urges his readers to share the information widely in order to protect the lady. [7]

And Beate Bahner, specialized lawyer for medical law, commented:

“This decision is a gigantic judicial scandal!!! Immediately executable! Tomorrow the composer is to be picked up. Then she will be vaccinated tomorrow at noon and, in addition, will probably be sedated with medication. I am stunned! A lawyer (Holger Fischer) has already filed a complaint. However, this does not prevent the judiciary and police from the immediate execution of this scandalous decision. This case must go to the public and to the press! Everyone must become active!“ [7]

The society of physicians and scientists for health, freedom and democracy e.V., MWGFD e.V., reports comprehensively and additionally publishes the letter of Mascha Orel, which is another Jewish woman living in Germany, born in Ukraine. In her open letter (engl. translation) she asked the court in Stuttgart to reconsider this decision. I spoke briefly with her to get more background information. [7]

Mascha Orel, co-founder of a humanitarian organization for holocaust survivors and their descendants, “We for Humanity,” reportedly spoke with the woman, and could not “confirm anything that was diagnosed in the report,” describing Zhvanetskaya as “vulnerable and frightened,” but having a “sharp mind.” Her true diagnosis is that she’s autistic, and “finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside of her music,” said Orel, adding that “if it goes after that, one would have to isolate all autistic people.” [8]

What was your experience with Inna?
I talked to her on the phone for an hour. It is a madness. I wanted to see for myself what her condition is. She is vulnerable, frightened, and has been living in this state for about 2 years, as her duty caregiver has apparently tried to institutionalize her several times. The sword of Damocles of institutionalization has been hanging over her head for a long time. She has drawn an unequivocal comparison, “It’s like when Dad was at the front and Mom had to flee with me and my brother.” [7]
Why was psychiatry pushed forward?
Inna has a good soul around her, a woman who is there for her out of Christian charity. The woman has a sharp mind. She told me that about two months ago the nursing service was given the task of washing and dressing her. She could do that herself, she was always well groomed. Why was this done? Then probably the next instruction came from the caregiver that they had to control the acceptance of medication. These are two knock-out criteria. If you don’t take care of yourself and refuse to take medication, you are worthy of care. But both are just not true, according to Inna Zhvanetskaya’s confidante. Her father was a doctor and pharmacologist, and she pays close attention to the side effects and expiration dates of medications. Her father probably also taught her to weigh the benefits and risks, she has a very conscious approach to the subject and that is probably why she so strictly rejected vaccination. She probably takes the prescribed medication (e.g. because of water in the leg). [7]
Do you know how she feels about her situation?
She finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside her music. Interaction with the outside world outside of her music is difficult for her. If that were the case, all autistic people would have to be isolated. It was a big effort for her to record the video, simply talking without a piano is not hers. But for her, it’s about her life. She talked and played for her life. That moved me to tears. That’s what Report24 called it: “Inna Zhvanetskaya plays for her life. And how she plays!” [7]

Children’s Health Defense stressed that “there is no medical or legal justification for compulsory vaccination,” and that the ruling is arbitrary. [8]
Martin Arieh Rudolph, chairman of the Jewish community in Bamberg, Bavaria sent a letter to the president of the Jewish community in Stuttgart, Barbara Traub, asking if she and the Jewish community could intervene to help Zhvanetskaya. [1]

“The facts seem unbelievable, because Germany has really learned nothing at all from history,” Report24 wrote. [4]

Michael Blume, the civil servant assigned to protect Jewish life in Baden-Württemberg state, including in its capital Stuttgart, is facing criticism on Twitter for failing to prioritize Zhvanetskaya’s case. There are calls for Blume to resign. [4]
Shai Glick, CEO of the Betsalmo—Human Rights in a Jewish Spirit NGO, told JNS,

“Anyone who acts against the people of Israel under the guise of anti-Zionism and anyone who supports the BDS movement, which applies a double standard solely towards the State of Israel, is himself antisemitic…. Mr. Blume should certainly not be in charge of the fight against antisemitism,” said Glick. [4]

Appeal

Zhvanetskaya’s lawyer, Holger Fischer, filed for an emergency appeal. On January 12, he posted on his Telegram channel that the Stuttgart regional court granted his application to suspend the compulsory vaccination until the decision on the appeal is made. Still, the composer might be forcefully institutionalized at any time, according to the lawyer. [8]

“We for Humanity” also contacted the court with an appeal. On the same day, the employees of the care service succinctly informed that Ms. Zhvanetskaya would have to sign the work assignments finally, no more would be needed, as Ms. Zhvanetskaya would be picked up the next day. The supervisor would be there. [7]

Current Covid Regulations

Days before (the appeal Ruling) German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach announced an easing of one of the country’s last remaining pandemic restrictions. Lauterbach said Friday that as of February 2, there will no longer be a mask mandate for long-distance trains and buses. [3]

Masks will still be required in doctor’s offices, with masks and negative COVID-19 tests both required for hospitals and nursing homes. [3]

The Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Code ( from Wikipedia) is an ethical guideline for preparing and conducting medical, psychological and other experiments on humans. It has been part of the medical ethical principles in medical training since its formulation in the verdict of the Nuremberg Medical Trial (1946/1947), similar to the Geneva Vow. It states that in medical experiments on humans [7]

“the voluntary consent of the subject (is) absolutely necessary. This means that the person concerned must be capable, in the legal sense, of giving consent; that he must be able, uninfluenced by force, fraud, trickery, coercion, overreaching, or any other form of persuasion or coercion, to exercise his judgment; that he must have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the field in question in its details to be able to make an understanding and informed decision.” The Nuremberg Code was prompted by the crimes against humanity committed in the name of medical research during the National Socialist era, in particular “criminal medical experiments” and forced sterilizations. [7]

Significance

Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [6]

Covid Critic Robin Monotti tweeted

“This is opening the floodgates potentially to mass incarceration of people who refuse to be injected with experimental products” [5]

Plaintiff’s Argument

The Plaintiff argues that she is of sound mind and understands the risks of the experimental injections

Defendant’s Argument

The defendant argues that the Plaintiff is mentally ill and unable to make decisions for herself

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

Decision

First Decision

On December 14 2022 a court order had authorized the forcible removal of Zhvanetskaya from her home in Stuttgart on Wednesday in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2]

Second Decision

On January 12 2023 A regional court has overruled the decision. [1]

Aftermath

Soviet-born composer Inna Zhvanetskaya is reportedly in hiding from German authorities after they attempted to have the 85-year-old Holocaust survivor committed to a mental institution and inoculated against her will with a Covid-19 shot, German outlet Report24 said on Thursday. [2]

Further Research

Court Documents:

In the news:

Media

Holocaust Survivor Jab Mandate Case – Jan 29 2023

source: Odysee / longXXvids

German court orders the forced Injection of Holocaust survivor -Jan 18 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light

Holocaust Survivor Pleads for her Life Link -Jan 10 2023

source: DeepThought

Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav speech at Nuremberg 75 -Aug 20 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light

Dr. Bodo Schiffmann Reports on the Forced Jab of Holocaust Survivor -Jan 11 2022

source: Odysee / 種 Datenarche

MUST WATCH: C19 Death Data Analysis for Every Country pre & post mRNA -Jan 12 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light

Rebel News Confronts Pfizer CEO at World Economic Forum -Jan 19 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light

Germany Vaccination Mortality Data -Dec 12 2022

source: Odysee / shortXXvids

Back to All Cases

LegalOpinion-PEI-Negligence

Legal Opinion: PEI Negligence of Duty

Re: the Negligence by the PEI not to investigate the Unusual Death statistics as it is directed to by law

Back to All Cases

Background

This is a summary of the legal opinion of lawyer Frank Großenbach representing data analyst Tom Lausen and the arguments of Martin Sichert (MP) given in a press conference in the Bundestag 12th Dec 2022.

Full (in German) press conference -Dec 12 2022

English subtitled video of M Sichert’s introduction -Dec 12 2022

Link to lawyer Großenbach’s letter to the PEI detailing their obligation under law to investigate unexpected deaths. (in original German and English translation)

The conference concerned itself with results from the analysis of medical diagnostic code data obtained by M Sichert by an FOI requestto the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (BVK). This data base covers about 72 million anonymised patient diagnosticrecords from doctor visits in Germany.

Expert Lausen’s analysis clearly showed an alarming deviation (increase) in the numbers of deaths associated with typical indicator codes temporally associated with onset of vaccination with the Covid-19 vaccines. Additionally, increased frequencies of diagnoses of a range of illnesses were observed also in temporal association with onset of vaccinations.

Link to Tom Lausen’s presentation

Legal Opinion:

The opinion of Sichert, Lausen and their lawyer,Großenbach is that the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute is in clear breach of its duty under law to investigate the significant number of unexpected deaths identified by Lausen using the same data available from the BVK.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute has NOT requested this data so far. They have never requested the data that could be obtained by means of a simple Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. (ref. Tom Lausen presentation slide #24)

Großenbach’s detailed legal argument against the PEI can be found here in his letter (in original German and English translation)

In a German language article published Dec 20, 2022 (English translation here ) The Epoch Times summarised Großenbach’s legal opinion as follows:

Frank Großenbach, a lawyer from Frankfurt, is also of the opinion that there is an “initial suspicion” because of the excess mortality “of at least 30,000 in 2021, the year of the vaccinations”, which is proven by data. This is not only sufficient, but even obligatory, to “withdraw the mRNA active substances from circulation” until it can be “safely excluded” that the excess mortality is due to the vaccinations. According to section 69 of the Medicines Act and due to the legal mandate according to section 13, paragraph 5 of the Infection Protection Act, the occurrence of a “warning signal” is sufficient to immediately withdraw the mRNA active substances from the market. He considers this warning signal to be given after Lausen’s analysis.
At the very least, however, “the population must be informed about the factual connections”, “so that everyone can act in a self-determined manner in their own knowledge of the data on their body”, demanded Großenbach. On 12 December, the day of the AfD press conference, he had already made a statement to the PEI on behalf of Tom Lausen (video at Odysee).
In his estimation, the statements of KBV head Andreas Gassen had even strengthened the position of the vaccination campaign sceptics: “He explains that the presented increased mortality would represent a normal pandemic event. This is a simple assessment of the figures. This assessment is not plausible”. With his statement, Gassen had indirectly “confirmed that the excess mortality determined by Tom Lausen was statistically correct. It is just that his conclusions from the figures presented are different”, explained Großenbach.

Großenbach in his letter to the PEI gave a deadline to respond by Dec 19 2022

If we have not received a statement from you by 12.00 noon on 19 December2022, we must assume that you intend to continue to remain inactive even though the data are now available to you, or if the statement does not make it clear that you are taking appropriate measures, we will immediately report you, the persons addressed in this letter, to the public prosecutor’s office at the Darmstadt Regional Court without further hesitation or waiting, on account of the violation of criminal law associated with the breach of your guarantor status. In order to be able to file a complaint immediately, we will already formulate a complaint now.

Keywords

Article, Bundestag, BVK, Darmstadt Regional Court, Data, Death, Duty, FOI, Gassen, germany, Großenbach, Lausen, Legal Opinion, Mandate, National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Negligence, Obligation, Paul Ehrlich Institute, PEI, Sichert, Vaccine, Violation

Back to All Cases

Background

on suspicion of:

Significance

Plaintiff’s Argument

Defendant’s Argument

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

Decision

Aftermath

Further Research

Court Documents:

In the news:

Media

References

Keyword

Background

Hiding & Video

Public Reaction

What was your experience with Inna?

Why was psychiatry pushed forward?

Do you know how she feels about her situation?

Appeal

Current Covid Regulations

The Nuremberg Code

Significance

Plaintiff’s Argument

Defendant’s Argument

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

Decision

First Decision

Second Decision

Aftermath

Further Research

Court Documents:

In the news:

Media

References

Keyword

Background

Legal Opinion:

Großenbach in his letter to the PEI gave a deadline to respond by Dec 19 2022

Related Articles & Videos

Keywords