At the end of this day of the trial, the man, who often speaks even when nobody asks him anything, suddenly becomes very quiet.

Franco A. sits pale and slumped behind the dock.

One of the lists he once composed can be seen on the screen in the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court.

"Central Council of Jews" and "Central Council of Muslims", among other things, it continues to read: "Hand grenade", "Detonation of the Rothschild stone" in Frankfurt and "Zerhetzung" of the German-Turkish rocker group Ottoman Germania.

The presiding judge asks whether this is a death list.

A. is silent for a long time, blinks, looks at the list.

No, he finally replies, that is a “research list”.

Alexander Haneke

Editor in politics.

  • Follow I follow

    Julian Staib

    Political correspondent for Hesse, Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland based in Wiesbaden.

    • Follow I follow

      In the trial against Bundeswehr officer A. before the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court, the indictment sometimes seemed quite constructed.

      The Federal Prosecutor's Office accuses A. of having planned attacks against public figures.

      For this he is said to have procured and hidden weapons.

      He wanted to blame a Syrian refugee for the deeds, who he pretended to be for over 15 months.

      On Tuesday, however, the allegations are conclusive for the first time.

      The two defenders As have also gone quiet.

      Your strategy seems to have failed.

      At the start of the trial, they loudly dismissed the charges as fabricated, and even denied the rule of law.

      According to her, A. is a patriot who wanted to draw attention to grievances in times of alleged injustice due to unbridled mass immigration.

      The defendant tried to reinforce this impression in the first days of the trial, was happy and carefree, willingly talked about his time as a supposed Syrian in Bavarian reception facilities, about his nice encounters with asylum seekers.

      On Tuesday, his confidence seemed blown away.

      The GBA lodged a complaint with the Federal Court of Justice

      Like his defenders, A. had apparently assumed that the process would be quick and exonerating. Obviously, they had assumed the court would stick to its 2018 line. At that time, the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court had expressed doubts about the version of the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (GBA). After she filed a charge of planning an attack, the court denied it. It saw no "sufficient suspicion" and referred the case to the Darmstadt Regional Court.

      There A. would have had to answer for significantly lesser offenses - for example for illegally possessing weapons. But the GBA appealed against the decision to the Federal Court of Justice, which then admitted the indictment. As a result, the higher regional court had to deal with the case. A. and his defense lawyers assumed that the court would quickly delegate the case to Darmstadt.

      The presiding judge Christoph Koller recently contradicted this clearly. "Do not assume that the Senate will stick to the 2018 view," said Koller. It is "all open". The procedure is "not traded small"; "We clear it up". And, addressing A. directly: “This is about a lot for you.” Even if there is no conviction according to Paragraph 89a of the Criminal Code, there is a risk of “substantial penalties” for the gun offenses alone. An "early confession" has a positive effect on the sentencing.

      He, according to the judge, assumed that there was a strategy on the part of the defense, but he had "considerable difficulties in recognizing such a", so far it had been: "We talk around." The negotiation has been going on for some time now, but one is as far as "as one can be on the first day". And, turning to A., it was “time to get down to business slowly”.