{"id":193,"date":"2022-04-15T13:53:13","date_gmt":"2022-04-15T13:53:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/?p=193"},"modified":"2022-08-19T18:55:09","modified_gmt":"2022-08-19T18:55:09","slug":"ursula-haverbecks-berlin-trial-lady-michele-renouf-reports","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/ursula-haverbecks-berlin-trial-lady-michele-renouf-reports\/","title":{"rendered":"Ursula Haverbeck’s Berlin trial \u2013 Lady Mich\u00e8le Renouf reports"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
On April 1, 2022 an April Fools\u2019 Day legal farce was played out under Allies (\u2018All lies\u2019) Occupied German laws where judges are obliged to rule that forensic \u201ctruth is no defense\u201d!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After three days of hearings (commenced in March) at the Berlin Regional Court, the Appeal hearing against the 93-year-old Frau Ursula Haverbeck came to an end. The verdict was one year\u2019s imprisonment without parole for the civil and civic-minded \u201cGerman grande dame of historical enquiry\u201d (as dubbed by the late great Scots-French documents analyst and leading revisionist Professor Robert Faurisson).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Two statements formed the substance of the trial. One was made more than six years ago, the other more than four years ago. There are no time limits and no parole for those who express \u201cheretical\u201d skepticism on one forensic off-limits historical era. In fact, post-war Germany\u2019s Basic Law is designed by the own-goal so-called victors to outlaw National Socialism in any form the law deems to call criminal, e.g. stickers bearing the wrong insignia or raising an arm to show how high your dog can jump! (Currently the latter \u201ccrime\u201d raised by Alfred Schaefer got him an extra year in Munich Prison!)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Readers will be outraged to learn that, as an accredited correspondent for The Barnes Review and the American Free Press, my AFP pass was deemed invalid for entry to the Berlin courtroom press gallery\u2026even as the Antifa hack was invited to take front row pride of place!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Luckily for me, although sad to see, the Public Gallery was barely a quarter filled. German citizens, as I learnt when covering the Schaefer Siblings trial in Munich (July 2018), fear \u2018being seen to take an interest\u2019 in such \u2018heresy\u2019 trials. They have to show their identity papers, \u00e0 la Orwell\u2019s \u201cBig Brother\u201d, for likewise this serves to intimidate the curious. Coronavirus G3 certificates were mandatory for the court even on the day when masks and other measures officially had been lifted! Somehow Attorney Nahrath had succeeded to make himself and client exempt. Mask mandates, one often sees, encourage unhealthy opportunities for State-endorsed, anti-civic bullying among citizens.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nUrsula Haverbeck (second left) outside the Berlin court of appeal on 1st April 2022 with (left to right) Dennis Ingo Schulz, Lady Mich\u00e8le Renouf, and Nikolai Nerling<\/em><\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
When Ursula emerged, never bitter, ever modest, from the courthouse, she was full of smiles, even hugs in modest gratitude for my coming to record her eloquent stand for the English-speaking world. Actually, when arrested at a Dresden Holocaust Commemoration in 2018, the first question the German police officer asked me was \u201cdo you know Haverbeck?\u201d. Proudly as an old personal friend, I proclaimed her as the greatest living German patriot in all the land \u2013 a national treasure!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Frau Ursula and late husband Professor Haverbeck founded the \u201cCollegium Humanum\u201d in Vlotho in 1963. It was at first an educational centre for environmental education and protective action. Later in 2008 it was banned for, among other scientific matters, their estimation that National Socialism was a better political and environmentally beneficial system than either under Bolshevik Communism or Globalist Capitalism. It was at this time that Frau Haverbeck began to take a forensic interest in the unexamined science of an unique mass murder weapon and eyewitness impossibilities concerning how this industrialised wartime phenomena worked and where were the physical remains of a \u201cHolocaust\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After the trial Wolfram Nahrath, Frau Haverbeck\u2019s attorney (and mine too) gave the AFP<\/em>, TBR<\/em> and H&D<\/em> readers an opportunity to learn more about the conduct of his unique client\u2019s case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Does Ursula now go straight to jail?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Attorney Nahrath: <\/strong>No. This is not the end of the Appeal process. Ursula Haverbeck can also appeal this verdict once again. Then the Highest Court of the State of Berlin, which for traditional reasons is called the Kammergericht<\/em> (Court of Appeal) in Berlin, will have to decide whether the prison sentence of one year without parole is valid. If the verdict of the Berlin Regional Court is upheld, Ursula Haverbeck will have to go to prison once again. She will appeal this verdict and continue her legal fight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> The ancient \u201cKammergericht\u201d court building came about during the middle of the 15th century by the Brandenburg Elector Friedrich II. Alas on this occasion the Appeal was heard in the new ugly appendage currently under scaffold. Today I believe the populace (if ever asked) would find that putting an antique lady aged 93 through trials about her skeptical opinions, the real crime!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n
\nDr. Rigolf Hennig (above centre with Ursula and Mich\u00e8le) \u2013 Ursula\u2019s loyal comrade \u2013 was a freedom fighter in the early 1960s for the return from Italy of the South Tyrol for reunification with Austria. In part successful, for today children there are allowed to speak German in schools. A dedicated organiser of Europ\u00e4ische Aktion, Rigolf\u2019s final action before he died last month, was to translate TBR interview by Dr. Edward de Vries with Lady Renouf on her attorney\u2019s victory in Dresden, published in the magazine Volk in Bewegung (People in Movement). Incidentally, this TBR interview was also translated into French by the revisionist Francis Goumain and published by the Swiss revisionist Rene-Louis Berclaz in the Swiss-French magazine Courrier du Continent.<\/em><\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
Nathrath:<\/strong> The three days of trial, especially today, were a tremendous strain for the old lady. During the trial, her long-time comrade-in-arms and friend Dr. Rigolf Hennig died. Ursula Haverbeck, however, withstood the enormous strain and kept her composure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Undauntable Ursula has outlived her valiant peers and goes on at 93 years to battle as an entire battalion in herself! I witnessed today in that courtroom how Ursula stood tall for 35 minutes, and stoic, to deliver her closing speech. I also witnessed how the Judge \u2013 so \u201cWoke\u201d anti-culture in her biased mind, tone, and callous words \u2013 was extraordinarily unprofessional. This included her insulting impertinence to chastise a lawyer for \u201craising his eyebrows\u201d during the summing up and sentencing. Quite as if you were on trial and subject to her personal judgment!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> The presiding judge could, according to my impression, hardly hide her anger towards Frau Haverbeck. Her tonal emphasis and the way she chose her words did not correspond, in parts, to the objectivity that judges should use as a matter of principle, I felt. She asked why I \u201craised my eyebrows\u201d but then refused any reply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> I heard the Prosecutor raised awareness of new \u201cmemory crimes\u201d was it in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> Yes, Resolution 76\/2022. This was raised before the presiding Judge said in her verdict to Frau Haverbeck that: \u201cYou are not a Holocaust researcher, you are a Holocaust denier. This is not knowledge that you spread, this is poison\u201d and that she had \u201cdistanced herself miles from historical truth\u201d and \u201cdamaged the memory of millions of murdered people.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> This puts one in mind of the Prosecutor in the Paris Court during the trials of Professor Robert Faurisson. She claimed the documents analyst \u201cmurdered the Jewish people twice\u201d ie for a second time when dead! I witnessed when this Paris court Prosecutor stood to pray (in secular France!) to Yahweh \u201cto protect His People from Robert Faurisson\u2019s deceitful lips\u201d! One can anticipate, given the universally comprehensive \u201cDefinition of Anti-Semitism\u201d that U.N. Resolutions for so-called \u201chuman rights\u201d and \u201chate speech\u201d and \u201cmemory laws\u201d will amount to adoption of the Judaic Noahide Laws for Gentiles (ie a binding set of universal \u201cmoral\u201d laws for those not among, but in service to Yahweh\u2019s Chosen People). So much for our universal \u2018we were never asked\u2019 democracy!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> As a defence attorney in such proceedings, one is severely limited in the possibilities of defence. Every application for the purpose of \u201ccounter-evidence\u201d against the \u201cobviousness\u201d of the so-called \u201cHolocaust\u201d is wiped away on the grounds that this event is known and accepted as above all doubt by the court, i.e. it is obvious. For the defence counsel, each of these proceedings is a dance on the tightrope. One \u201cwrong\u201d word and he himself later sits in the dock. The phrase you yourself dubbed in your Telling Films Jailing the Lawyers<\/em> is always an accompanying reality in Germany in connection with proceedings of \u201cHolocaust denial\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n(left to right) G\u00fcnter Deckert, Sylvia Stolz, and Lady Mich\u00e8le Renouf following the release of Frau Stolz from a prison sentence<\/strong><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Having to defend clients under laws which prohibit a lawyer in cases of historical skepticism from presenting evidential exhibits in their client\u2019s defense, makes achieving any unbiased justice seem virtually impossible. I witnessed in Mannheim Court where Attorney Sylvia Stolz was warned by the Judge if she continued to defend her client (the late great publicist Ernst Z\u00fcndel) \u201ctoo well\u201d that she too would be prosecuted and indeed she was! You had mentioned that serious attempts have been made upon you and other lawyers who have defended your skeptical clients \u201ctoo well\u201d \u2013 an \u201cAlice in Wonderland\u201d accusation. Completely the reverse of a rational courtroom where to do otherwise would be deemed seriously incompetent and open to action by your client for professional negligence!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> I regret that I did not succeed in achieving a \u201cbetter\u201d result for my client in this second instance before the Regional Court in Berlin. All arguments, including the massive criticism against the penal provision of Section 130 (3) of the German Criminal Code and against the case law, ultimately went unheard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> I was appalled to see how the Judge projected upon your client her own unproven opinion that Ursula \u201cknew she was lying\u201d as in the peculiarly German meaning of \u201cHolocaust-Leugnung\u201c. In German, Leugnung means one knowingly lies when denying something \u2013 whereas in English to deny something does not necessarily carry any knowing intention to lie.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> In her summary, the Judge put the 93-year-old in a bad light, insinuating that she wanted to make herself important with her appearance in the past years as a lonely woman, playing herself up as a \u201cgrande dame<\/em>,\u201d which the Judge concluded, from among other things, the fact that Frau Haverbeck reported in the trial about the quantities of \u201cfan mail\u201d to the prison. In fact, Frau Haverbeck received a large amount of sympathetic mail from all over the world.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nLady Mich\u00e8le Renouf with Wolfram Nahrath outside the Berlin court<\/em><\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Yes indeed your client not only received sympathetic mail but also, I know she received flowers by the dozens when she was in prison, for I was among her many international admirers who sent them!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> The Judge repeatedly explained why in her opinion Ursula Haverbeck had devoted herself to the subject of the \u201cHolocaust\u201d in the first place. In truth, the subject had not interested her at all for a long time during the era of the Collegium Humanum. Thereby the Judge claimed without proof that decades of research were undertaken partly while Ursula was still together with her husband Werner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> When and why did Ursula begin to take an interest in the \u201cHolocaust\u201d?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> She had attended war crimes trials in Germany, read countless books and papers, and spoken with the authors. She had never received a definite answer from other authorities, such as the Central Council of Jews in Germany, the public prosecutor\u2019s offices and other institutions, to the questions she had asked about the crime scenes and the means of committing the crimes. Finally the director of the memorial of the concentration camp Auschwitz, Danuta Czech was shown on public television in 1993 with the statement that due to new findings the number of victims of Auschwitz had to be corrected, from originally 4 million to a good 1 million and the memorial plaque was then actually changed accordingly. Then a well-known Spiegel<\/em> editor in the magazine Osteuropa<\/em> reduced the total number of victims to approx. 565,000 (356,000 of them in Auschwitz), and he moved the location of this alleged gassing to outside the central camp. It was after these developments that Frau Haverbeck\u2019s attention to the topic become more concrete. She asked the comprehensible question: where then had the other many millions of people been gassed? Again, she had not received any answers from the appointed authorities. However, in the course of the years she had received and read more and more works, which brought further aspects of doubt, also about the means of the murder weapon \u201cZyklon B\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nThe great revisionist scholar Professor Robert Faurisson outside one of his many court appearances<\/em><\/strong> <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> As I have understood from the leading historical revisionists whom I know personally, none \u201cdenies\u201d anything; they simply confirm their forensic findings.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> As a result, Frau Haverbeck gave more weight to the historians and the natural scientists than to the lawyers, whom she thinks are not ready to deal with these works and circumstances. She does not \u201cdeny\u201d because she cannot do so at all. She is asking questions that have not been answered in this trial either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> I think I heard the Judge designate the works of British military historian David Irving, Swiss revisionist J\u00fcrgen Graf, Planck Institute graduate Germar Rudolf, Jewish \u201cHolocaust\u201d analyst Gerard Menuhin, and <\/em>The Holocaust Industry author Professor Norman Finkelstein among others as \u201cpseudo-scientists\u201d and \u201cdeniers\u201d who knowingly lie.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> Today\u2019s presiding Judge also chose the familiar path and described all these works as pseudo-scientific \u2013 and thus included works by members of the victim\u2019s people. She claimed that Frau Haverbeck, who was 16 years old at the end of the war, knew precisely that the \u201cHolocaust\u201d had taken place as it had always been evident to all Germans. Therefore, the Judge proclaimed that it is particularly reprehensible that Frau Haverbeck only expresses herself one-sidedly and denies it against her better knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> I marvelled at how Ursula at age 93 could endure listening right from the start of the day to the Judge reading aloud a relentless monologue of past cases of \u201cspeech crimes\u201d committed by your client, without a moment\u2019s pause for well over two hours!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> In its formulations, the Judge\u2019s opening statement took in already known guidelines from other judgments. She did not ever address the question of the possible human rights violation of the penal provision. Frau Haverbeck and also the younger generation of Germans had no personal guilt for this \u201cmonstrous crime\u201d, but according to the law they had the responsibility to ensure that such a \u201ccrime\u201d would never happen again in the world. And for this, according to the presiding Judge, it was right and important that this penal provision existed in order to take action against people like Frau Haverbeck. Those who do not obey the law must go to prison.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Talk about \u201cone-sided knowledge\u201d set in cement! Our readers will be appalled at how any humane nation, nearly a century after a war, can send to prison a very elderly woman of evident intellectual calibre and good character, for her tenacity to study historical events, as the late Professor Robert Faurisson put it \u201clike a police detective\u201d. The Judge said Haverbeck had learnt nothing when she talked about Jews and Germans for she should know that \u201cJews can be Germans and Germans can be Jews\u201d. The little this \u201cWoke\u201d-blinded Judge knows about racial differences and indeed Judaic Talmudic law wherein non-Jews are described as not human but \u201cas cattle\u201d. Thereby in accord with Jewish law, to save a human life means saving only a Jewish life. I recall your once telling me that even conscientious judges also risk prosecution if they allow a lawyer to defend his \u201cHolocaust\u201d querying clients \u201ctoo well\u201d. This was at the time of my making a Telling Film called Jailing the Judges in 2008 when two Germany ex-Constitutional Court judges, Hassemer and Hoffman-Riem, called for the \u201cHolocaust-denial\u201d laws to be repealed.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> Yes I do recall this, however no follow-up came of it. Before the sentence was pronounced, I asked whether one could still sleep peacefully if Frau Haverbeck were to be sent to prison again for opinions expressed more than six years ago or more than four years ago. Frau Haverbeck had not killed, injured, robbed, raped, abused, stolen from or defrauded anyone, she had, merely, said something! However, the Judge dealt with this in her statement of the reasons for the verdict and said that it would be possible to sleep well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Indeed it might be possible, in accord with her thoroughly \u201cWoke\u201d warped judgment, that this will earn her career rewards. I say \u201cWoke\u201d, because it was pointed out to me that she used politically correct, trendy made-up pluralisms \u2013 a mix of male and female gendered pronouns and new creations. Such \u201cWoke\u201d-addling notions aim to blur distinctions, erase the subtleties of expressing human relationships, and arrest commonsense. I noted also that the male lay judge was casually attired in a jumper \u2013 representing a drop in sartorial standards unbefitting for an official appearance in court and disrespectful at a formal occasion. What seemed so unrelated was how the Judge almost from the beginning of her opening statements and repeatedly thereafter referred to the conflict with Ukraine. I experience the Ukraine\u2019s presidential broadcasts as wall-to-wall omniscient \u201cBig Brother\u201d monopolized bias, yet I did wonder how this too was being woven into the constitutionally biased case against Ursula?!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nahrath:<\/strong> Years ago when the Americans sent weapons to the East, Frau Haverbeck predicted war would erupt between the Ukraine and Russia. She saw the Ukraine as the geopolitical tinderbox between Europe and Asia. On the Internet she had said in 2017-18 that if we do not solve the problem in the Ukraine, we shall see the beginning of WW3. I said this observation shows Frau Haverbeck looks ahead to future geopolitical happenings not only to the causes of past events and thereby her mind is mentally alert and responsibly concerned with the present. I requested acquittal and I am convinced that this was and remains the only correct request. The legal battle in this matter is not yet over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MLR:<\/strong> Thank you Wolfram for your thoughts. Clearly you and your equally valiant client are nobody\u2019s April Fools!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
The aspect of that Day in Berlin which heartened me the most was the way the police guards in the courtroom ceased to take any further robotic interest in whether some persons in the public gallery where wearing their masks correctly \u2026 once Attorney Nahrath began his closing speech.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nViennese attorney Dr Herbert Schaller (above right) with his client Ernst Z\u00fcndel and Lady Mich\u00e8le Renouf on the day of Ernst\u2019s release from Mannheim prison<\/strong><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
At this moment RA Nahrath put me in mind of the late great Austrian attorney Dr. Herbert Schaller, the veteran who got David Irving out of the Viennese Prison on Appeal in 2007. After that success in which he was able to address (in Austria) the vagueness of \u201cHolocaust\u201d eyewitnesses, this prompted the own-goal so-called victor authorities to introduce a new age-limit for practicing in his field of law specifically to prevent him (already aged 85!) from taking on new and again successful cases! There is something about that wartime generation whereby many of those sixteen years\u2019 old survivors exemplify the four inseparable Classical Virtues, of Measure, Just Objectivity, Forensic attitude, and empathetic Courage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Berlin court guards shifted their focus totally on Nahrath\u2019s every word, riveted by his measured tone and modest eloquence. With evident balanced authority, he commanded their rapt attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It showed me that anti-German brainwashed policemen are still capable of listening and taking in alternative reasoning. All, thereby, may be by no means lost!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mich\u00e8le, Lady Renouf<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
On April 1, 2022 an April Fools\u2019 Day legal farce was played out under Allies (\u2018All lies\u2019) Occupied German laws where judges are obliged to rule that forensic \u201ctruth is no defense\u201d! After three days of hearings (commenced in March) at the Berlin Regional Court, the Appeal hearing against the 93-year-old Frau Ursula Haverbeck cameContinue reading “Ursula Haverbeck’s Berlin trial \u2013 Lady Mich\u00e8le Renouf reports”<\/span>
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/smiling-at-UH-MR-NN.jpeg?resize=480%2C640&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/UH-RH-LMR.jpeg?resize=538%2C317&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/DeckertStolzRenouf-672pxWide-e1426262685601.jpeg?resize=500%2C376&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/WN-MR-1-768x1024-1.jpeg?resize=384%2C512&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Robert-Faurisson-at-Paris-court.jpeg?resize=537%2C403&ssl=1\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jailingopinions.com\/realhistory\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/schaller-zundel-renouf-768x415-1.jpeg?resize=576%2C311&ssl=1\")