Defendant lets deal burst

Defendant lets deal burst

After more than two hours of testimony, the prosecutor’s patience ran out on friday. Jana huber interrupted defendant O. During his testimony: "is this a joke, what you are reporting here?? Is that your idea of making a deal??" Huber was visibly incensed: "the public prosecutor’s office agreed to the deal on the condition that you stick to the agreement." What the 39-year-old defendant has said so far are merely "tales", and that means your agency is no longer bound by the terms of the settlement agreement.
Background: a week ago, six defendants were sentenced to several years in prison for aggravated gang theft. The men from the czech republic, moldova and romania had stolen vehicles in germany and moved them to the czech republic. One of the manneres testified as a witness against the others involved and is therefore in a witness protection program.

Workshop as transshipment point

The 39-year-old o., the man the prosecution alleges to have been a wire-puller and gang leader was, after an appropriate plea bargain, briefly described by the presiding judge as a "deal" designated – separated from the previous main process. Not only the court, but also the investigators hoped for a comprehensive clarification of the people behind the gang.
On friday, the trial began, now under a new file number, against the 39-year-old, who, according to police witnesses, ran a workshop in the czech republic where the stolen cars, vans and construction machinery were allegedly dismantled into individual parts and resold. In the process, the man is alleged to have acted as a gang leader.
The "deal" between the two defense attorneys, the public prosecutor’s office and the first gross criminal division at the district court should regulate the further course of action in the proceedings. In exchange for a full confession, the defendant was given a maximum sentence of seven years and six months. For this reason, it was possible to dispense with extensive evidence gathering, questioning of witnesses and expert opinions.

Fence or thief?

Prosecution charges defendant with some 62 counts of grand theft by gang. "It is to be clear whether he was a fence or a stealer", said presiding judge christoph gillot on the role of the accused.
The 39-year-old spent two hours answering the charges. In more than half of the cases, he denied involvement, could not remember or commit. Out of fear of his co-defendants, the backers and the political situation in the czech republic, he has not testified so far, he explained. His wife and son had received threatening letters. Moreover, it is "simply not true", that he was a kind of "boss had been. Instead, he named names: the defendant V, who was sentenced to four years in prison., who had testified in the witness protection program, and his friend M., the accused, who is still at large, was allegedly involved in the series of thefts. "I do not understand why M. So far no one has asked." He declared his willingness to reveal the whereabouts of M. To communicate.
In addition, the defendant named customers and other men who allegedly helped with the thefts or the dismantling of the vehicles. He agreed to clarify how the vehicles of the brands BMW, VW, mercedes and skoda were cracked by means of electronic control units.
After the defendant explained the suspicious vehicle movements of the convicted compagnons around his workshop with the blocking of a penalty, the prosecutor lost patience. The confession did not go far enough for her. She announced that the deal was off: "is that the way you want it??"
After consulting with his attorneys, O remained. During his testimony. He was, however, prepared to make further statements. "My client is less concerned about the penalty than about the civil claims that could be made against him, said his lawyer narine schulz. Prosecutor huber countered: "I am sure that we will find O. The accused was able to prove the following facts. It is only a question of time."

Once again clear

Gillot finally declared the deal a failure. In this case, however, even the defendant is no longer bound by his confession. In its reasoning, the court stated, among other things, that the confession was incomplete both in the number of offenses admitted and in the role played by O. In the gang played allegedly, far behind the agreements lagged.
Now the court must again clarify what role O. Exactly played. If his involvement is in fact as minor as the defendant claims, the "deal" would be a "no deal" agreed penalty too high, judge explained. In the other case, if the 39-year-old had been the wire-puller and gang leader after all, the not very meaningful confession would no longer play a major role. Judge gillot: "the punishment in this case was too low and no longer appropriate to the crime and guilt."
The trial will be held on thursday, 21. December, continued at coburg regional court.