display
Frankfurt / Kassel (dpa) - The trial of the violent death of the Kassel District President Walter Lübcke is certainly one of the most sensational criminal cases in recent years.
Now the judgment of the State Security Senate of the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Frankfurt is due next Thursday - after 44 days of negotiations.
An overview of the case, the defendants, and the trial:
THE DEED: On the night of June 2, 2019, Lübcke was found lifeless on the terrace of his house in Wolfhagen-Istha (Kassel district).
A gunshot wound to the head came from a revolver.
The death of the 65-year-old is determined that same night.
display
THE VICTIM: Walter Lübcke was district president in Northern Hesse.
Its authority is, so to speak, the local representation of the state of Hesse.
The CDU politician was considered popular and close to the people.
Lübcke left behind his wife Irmgard Braun-Lübcke and the adult sons Christoph and Jan-Hendrik Lübcke.
You appear in the proceedings as a joint plaintiff.
It is particularly important to them to learn the truth about the last minutes in Walter Lübcke's life.
THE ACCUSED: The main defendant is the 47-year-old German Stephan Ernst from Kassel.
At first glance, the father of the family lives a middle-class life.
But even as a teenager he came into conflict with the law, often because of xenophobic crimes: in 1989 he set fire to the basement of an apartment building with Turkish residents.
He later stabbed a foreign citizen, carried out a pipe bomb attack on an asylum seekers' home, and hit a foreign inmate with a chair leg while in custody.
In 2009 he was involved in an attack by right-wing extremists at a rally in Dortmund.
After that, he allegedly withdrew from the scene, and the authorities no longer had him in focus.
The contact with old comrades, which was also shown in the process, remained nonetheless.
The murder of Lübcke is not the only act for which Ernst has to answer before the OLG.
He is also charged with attempted murder of an Iraqi refugee who was seriously injured in a knife attack in January 2016.
display
The second defendant is Markus H. from Kassel.
The German is also known as a right-wing extremist.
Ernst referred to him as his "anchor", and one witness described the relationship between the two men as "thinker" H. and "doer" Ernst.
H. is said to have influenced Ernst politically, and the prosecutors are convinced that joint target practice also enabled him to commit the act in the first place.
The Lübcke family's lawyer was convinced in his closing lecture: "Without the defendant H., the murder of Walter Lübcke would not have taken place."
During the search of H.'s apartment and computer, the investigators came across extensive right-wing extremist material and numerous Nazi devotional objects.
During the trial and before the police, H. refused to testify.
Only when it came to the report of an expert for weapons, he spoke up and showed great familiarity with the subject of weapons.
THE DEFENDERS: Stephan Ernst has changed defense lawyers three times since his arrest, and in the course of the proceedings he parted with one of his two public defenders, who is said to have suggested an untrue confession.
The main defender is now the Cologne criminal lawyer Mustafa Kaplan.
The Turkish-born lawyer was a victim's lawyer in the process surrounding the National Socialist underground NSU.
Markus H. is represented by Björn Clemens from Düsseldorf and Nicole Schneiders from Ettlingen.
Clemens is considered a scene lawyer who often works for right-wing extremists.
Schneiders defended one of the defendants in the NSU trial.
display
THE MOTIVE: Apparently it was a citizens' meeting in Lohfelden in northern Hesse in 2015, at which Lübcke defended the admission of refugees.
In response to shouts from the audience, he shouted: "You have to stand up for values, and anyone who does not represent these values can leave this country at any time if he does not agree, that is the freedom of every German."
Ernst and H. were also at this meeting, where Ernst first became aware of the CDU politician.
On a video that, according to Ernst, H. had posted on the Internet, in addition to the quote from Lübcke, an interjection from Ernst could be heard.
Lübcke received numerous hate mails.
With the murder, so his widow said in court, words became deeds.
DIE PLÄDOYERS: Life imprisonment for murder, determining the particular gravity of the guilt and subsequent safekeeping - the Federal Prosecutor's Office has demanded the maximum penalty for Ernst.
Markus H. is to be sentenced to a prison term of nine years and eight months for aiding and abetting.
The lawyer of the widow appearing as a joint plaintiff and the two sons of Lübcke, however, emphasized in his closing lecture that the family consider H. to be an accomplice - he too must be convicted of murder.
Ernst's defense lawyer, on the other hand, pleaded for a manslaughter conviction because the murder characteristics were not given.
In the case of the Iraqi refugee, he pleaded for acquittal in his closing lecture - Ernst did not commit the act.
Markus H.'s defense lawyers pleaded for their client to be acquitted.
They argued that the arguments against H. were based to a large extent on the statements of Ernst, who had already held others responsible for his actions in the past.
THE COURT: The OLG judges have many years of experience with particularly serious crimes and terrorist proceedings.
In the past few years it was mainly Islamist defendants who, for example, as members of the IS terrorist militia in Frankfurt, had to answer to one of the two state security senates.
There have also been trials against alleged spies.
The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court is the only one in Hesse and is responsible, among other things, for proceedings that are prosecuted by the Federal Public Prosecutor because of their particular importance - as in the Lübcke case.
CORONA PANDEMIC: The public interest in the process turned out to be great.
If you wanted a seat in the courtroom, you had to get up early on many days, because the distance rules to protect against corona infections also apply in the courthouse.
In the auditorium, mouth and nose must be kept covered.
Due to the distance of 1.5 meters, not every row of seats can be occupied.
Although the negotiation takes place in the largest negotiation room, there are only 19 seats in the press box and 18 seats in the auditorium.
© dpa-infocom, dpa: 210127-99-185012 / 2