When the verdict was pronounced, Seda Basay-Yildiz stood in front of the court with Janine Wissler and Martina Renner and said: "I can live with this verdict." The Frankfurt lawyer was the first to receive a threatening fax from the "NSU 2.0 “ had gotten.

Others followed, in which her then two-year-old daughter was threatened with the worst violence, the names of her husband and parents were mentioned, dates of birth and addresses of the family, first the old and later the new one that Basay-Yildiz had blocked.

Anna Sophia Lang

Editor in the Rhein-Main-Zeitung.

  • Follow I follow

Many other people from all over Germany were threatened by "NSU 2.0" in the following two and a half years: left-wing politicians such as Wissler or Renner, journalists, cabaret artists, public prosecutors and investigators, courts and the Walter Lübcke School.

Above all, he chose women, people with a migration background and those who were active against the right.

In May 2021, a mobile task force in Berlin arrested a suspect: Alexander M., IT technician, mid-50s, criminal record, unemployed for years and socially isolated.

The trial at the Frankfurt Regional Court began in February 2022.

But because it turned out that shortly before the first threatening fax, there had been a data query on Basay-Yildiz and her daughter in the 1st police station in Frankfurt - and the investigators found a chat group with inciting content,

M. was already posing as a police officer

The Frankfurt Regional Court ruled on Thursday: All things considered, it can be assumed that the accused was the sole perpetrator.

No evidence of accomplices was found, although everything had been done.

Since Ms' arrest, no more threatening letters signed "NSU 2.0" have been sent.

The presiding judge explained in detail why the court is convinced that M. also wrote the first threatening fax.

"That gave us a headache," she said.

"There is a lot to be said for it, but there are doubts." It is possible that a police officer queried Basay-Yildiz's data and shared it on the Darknet, but this cannot be proven.

Overall, however, it is more likely that M. is responsible.

He had previously been convicted for posing as a police officer,

In addition, many books on the subject of manipulation were found on him, as well as a document in which he noted sentences such as: "Don't call the public prosecutor there anymore."

However, it was also not the task of the process to clarify who could have requested the data if not M. What one had against the police officer Johannes S., who had been suspected in the meantime, "is not enough".

The fact that the series of threats was "like a piece" speaks for the guilt of the accused.

Formulations, the salutation, Ms's personality and references in later threatening letters that only the perpetrator could know led to the conclusion that he also wrote the first one.

He had confessed to this to a journalist and in other letters.

The chamber sees Alexander M. transferred overall as "NSU 2.0" because e-mails from the mail provider used were found on him, data from victims, links and entire distribution lists from threatening letters, parts of threatening letters and formulations that repeatedly appeared in them.

M. got involved cleverly, but contradictingly.

He had access to the offender's mailbox and logged in.

His admission that he received the letters from a chat forum on the Darknet has been refuted.

Threatening faxes were also found in the inbox.

The language used in the letters produced a uniform picture in terms of style and choice of words: “The list is long and shows that the letters came from the same pen.

No one else puts it that way.”

Precautions for Concealment

The judges considered the fact that the series of threats was getting worse and "the suffering of those affected increased with each new letter" to increase the punishment.

Personal data was used towards third parties and to reinforce the threat, as were references to terrorist attacks.

M. suggested that he was not acting alone.

He took precautions to cover up, insulted a victim in the process and caused massive repercussions for those affected, including the children of some of them: "What the children are doing is a drama." The total sentence was five years and ten months the Chamber also entered resisting law enforcement officers in arrest, possession of juvenile pornography and possession of two chokesticks.

She upheld the arrest warrant.

At the beginning of the verdict, the chairperson referred to Article 1 of the Basic Law: Human dignity is inviolable.

This sentence is increasingly relevant with regard to hate and hate speech.

The trial showed how traumatizing it is when this dignity is violated by words.

"The Chamber has tried to do justice to the mandate of the Basic Law." She also tried to clarify the background.

"We didn't succeed." But the chance was slim - and the clarification of the chat scandal was not the task.

Basay-Yildiz, Wissler and Renner said afterwards that they did not believe in a single perpetrator.

There are too many unanswered questions for that.

It must now be further investigated.

Nevertheless, Basay-Yildiz says: "The verdict has an important signal effect for everyone who is exposed to hatred and hate speech in Germany.

The Chair has made the implications for those injured clear.”