A legal case in Germany has recently come to my attention which is
worth analysing because a number of learning experiences can be
derived from it. This case has not done the rounds in the English
speaking environment, but a lot of things can be learned from it, i.e
how NOT to do things.
This author stumbled upon the Fizman/Körppen case by chance only
recently although the murder is now 12 years in the past. One moonless
night, I typed in a few names of people I knew in Frankfurt, and was
in for a number of surprises.
The offensive aspects of the Fiszman/Körppen case are the way the
German judiciary allows attorneys to erode freedom of speech, oppress
the truth, milk the taxpayer, and writers without a valid reason.
Criminal investigations leave out answers, and convicted criminals are
mollycoddled at the expense of the innocent public. We are reminded of
John Le Carré's book 'The little drummer girl' where he writes on page
170, "ah, the selfishness of the French, the decadence of the
Italians,and the greed of the Germans.....'.
The Germans have created a system where attorneys can fine people,
become law enforcement for their own profit, after milking the
taxpayer first.
In the Körppen case it worked like that: Herr Körppen Senior and Herr
Körppen Junior were both found guilty of Fiszman's abduction. Körppen
Senior was guilty of the murder part as well, and thus got life plus
'security lockup' as they call it, which is the equivalent of 'never
to be released' - just in case some do-gooder wants to let the repeat
offender loose again.
Previously, Körppen Senior had spent seven years in prison after the
death of his first wife. It was not explained in those articles why he
had seven years. If he was guilty in this death case, he should have
had a longer sentence; if he was innocent, then he should not have had
seven years. What kind of judges do they have in Germany?
Körppen Junior got less in the Fiszman case, because he had been
slightly cooperative with police. Both would have had links to grubby
networks, because they admitted to stealing from construction sites
regularly, meaning that they had a customer base who bought stolen
goods from them.
After Körppen Senior was convicted to spend the rest of his life in
jail in the Fiszman case, he desired that his name should no longer be
in the media. He contacted his lawyer in Frankfurt/M, complaining that
publishing his name was hindering his right to self-fulfillment.
Getting the name censored out required a court case. As he obviously
did not have money to pay legal eagles and courts, his attorney
applied for legal aid. The taxpayer obliged and the case was dragged
through the courts, whose judges decided that he, the 'never to be
released' Körppen, had a right to self-fulfillment (!?).
Everybody who then wrote about the partially unclarified Körppen/
Fiszman case and mentioned the names of the convicted perpetrators got
expiation notices from that attorney's office, lining that attorney's
pockets. The English language media have more freedom of speech and a
less censoring set-up, which is the reason why the names can be cited
on the English language web.
But wait, there is more! The next step was then, that Körppen wanted
to have all archives altered, i.e. deletion of their names. Sure
enough, the German taxpayer funded these court cases as well, but this
time the judges said no. Archives did not have to be altered.
To fill their pockets, all the Körppen attorneys need to do is sift
through the internet, if there is a new entry in German citing the
perpetrators' name, then send out invoices. Should the chronicler not
pay, they take them to court, at taxpayer's expense of course.
This system stems from a sick mind, but those of us who have first
hand experience in how even the government under Helmut Kohl stole
from people, are not surprised. It is that élite mentality, which
wangles easy money to one another. How bizarre and unjust is it, that
convicted criminals get public money but honest little guys cannot
afford justice, which I experienced in 1995.
Many question marks remain in this abduction and murder case; e.g.
what exactly was the connection between the Körppen (house painters)
and Fiszman families to be targeted twice, years and kms apart when
even the surname spelling was not the same?
Anti-semitism is extremely unlikely because there was no hint that the
deceased was religious in any way when I knew the deceased.
Only Fiszman Senior was Jewish, the mother was Russian Orthodox, and
he went to church alone. The most likely connection would be the 1983
renovation of a building owned by the deceased's father and
retrofitted to house American Express. That, or any other type of
connection, never came out, but establishing such connections between
victims' and perpetrators' families is very important to know so that
others can learn from whatever occurred leading up to the unfortunate
death of Jakub Fiszman.
 The most important aspects are of course:
1. Why did police not clarify the connections between Fiszmans and
Körppens or suppress them in the media?
2. The German system allows attorneys to tap into taxpayers' funds who
then profit as law enforcers.
2. Censorship in Germany: Someone who is convicted to life for murder,
plus security lockup, cannot have a right to anonymity.
3. The no-brainer of the German judiciary to entertain the idea that a
'never to be released' may have a right to self-fulfillment.
Germany has some very serious questions to answer, and her growing
influence in Europe is a very frightening prospect indeed.

On Jun 13, 11:46 am, AHaGu  wrote:
> A legal case in Germany has recently come to my attention which is worth analysing because a number of learning experiences can be derived from it. This case has not done the rounds in the English speaking environment, but a lot of things can be learned from it, i.e how NOT to do things.

> This author stumbled upon the Fizman/Körppen case by chance only recently although the murder is now 12 years in the past. One moonless night, I typed in a few names of people I knew in Frankfurt, and was in for a number of surprises.
The offensive aspects of the Fiszman/Körppen case are the way the
German judiciary allows attorneys to erode freedom of speech, oppress
the truth, milk the taxpayer, and writers without a valid reason.
> Criminal investigations leave out answers, and convicted criminals are mollycoddled at the expense of the innocent public. We are reminded of John Le Carré's book 'The little drummer girl' where he writes on page 170, "ah, the selfishness of the French, the decadence of the
Italians,and the greed of the Germans.....'.
> The Germans have created a system where attorneys can fine people, become law enforcement for their own profit, after milking the taxpayer first.
> In the Körppen case it worked like that: Herr Körppen Senior and Herr Körppen Junior were both found guilty of Fiszman's abduction. Körppen
Senior was guilty of the murder part as well, and thus got life plus
'security lockup' as they call it, which is the equivalent to 'never
to be released' - just in case some do-gooder wants to let the repeat
offender loose again. Previously, Körppen Senior had spent seven years
in prison after the death of his first wife. It was not explained in
those articles why he
had seven years. If he was guilty in this death case, he should have
had a longer sentence; if he was innocent, then he should not have had
seven years. What kind of judges do they have in Germany?
Körppen Junior got less in the Fiszman case, because he had been
slightly cooperative with police. Both would have had links to grubby
networks, because they admitted to stealing from construction sites
regularly, meaning that they had a customer base who bought
(knowingly) stolen goods from them.
After Körppen Senior was convicted to spend the rest of his life in
jail in the Fiszman case, he desired that his name should no longer be
in the media. He contacted his lawyer in Frankfurt/M, complaining that
publishing his name was hindering his right to self-fulfillment.
Getting the name censored out required a court case. As he obviously
did not have money to pay legal eagles and courts, his attorney
applied for legal aid. The taxpayer obliged and the case was dragged
through the courts, whose judges decided that he, the 'never to be
released' Körppen, had a right to self-fulfillment (!?).
Everybody who then wrote about the partially unclarified Körppen/
Fiszman case and mentioned the names of the convicted perpetrators got
expiation notices from that attorney's office, lining that attorney's
pockets.
The English language media have more freedom of speech and a set-up,
which is the reason why the names can be cited on the English language
web.
But wait, there is more! The next step was then, that Körppen wanted
to have all archives altered, i.e. deletion of their names. Sure
enough, the German taxpayer funded these court cases as well, but this
time the judges said no. Archives did not have to be altered.
To fill their pockets, all the Körppen attorneys need to do is sift
through the internet, if there is a new entry in German citing the
perpetrators' name, then send out invoices. Should the chronicler not
pay up, they take them to court, at taxpayer's expense of course.
> This system stems from a sick mind, but those of us who have first hand experience in how even the government under Helmut Kohl stole from people, are not surprised. It is that élite, greed, mentality, which wangles easy money to one another. How bizarre and unjust is it, that
convicted criminals get public money but honest little guys cannot
afford justice, when they are fleeced by the government, which I
experienced in 1995.
> Many question marks remain in this abduction and murder case; e.g. what exactly was the connection between the Körppen (house painters)
and Fiszman families to be targeted twice, years and kms apart when
even the surname spelling was not the same?
> Anti-semitism is extremely unlikely because there was no hint that the deceased was religious in any way when I knew him.
Only Fiszman Senior was Jewish, the mother was Russian Orthodox, and
she went to church alone. The most likely connection would be the 1983
renovation of a building owned by the deceased's father and
retrofitted to house American Express. That, or any other type of
connection, never came out, but establishing such connections between
victims' and perpetrators' families is very important to know, so
others can learn from whatever occurred leading up to the unfortunate
death of Jakub Fiszman in 1996.
>  The most important aspects are of course:
> 1. Why did police not clarify the connections between Fiszmans and
> Körppens or suppress them in the media?
> 2. The German system allows attorneys to tap into taxpayers' funds who
> then profit as law enforcers.
> 2. Censorship in Germany: Someone who is convicted to life for murder,
> plus security lockup, cannot have a right to anonymity.
> 3. The no-brainer of the German judiciary to entertain the idea that a 'never to be released' may have a right to self-fulfillment.

Germany has some very serious questions to answer, and her growing
influence in Europe is a very frightening prospect indeed.