>>> Gabriel and Begonia both make their statement >>> Judge reads judicial hint regarding which sentence the court could consider >>> Barts application for release is dismissed >>> Judge asks about final speech

As protest against the exaggerated safety measures Gabriel appears in underpants only again. After the applause of solidarity for the accused and the normal refusal of standing up when the judge comes in the hearing of the witnesses began.

1. Witness : First it was Garth Allen Pursey, lecturer, who was heard. He testified when turning off he saw out of his car two other, car X and Y. Next to car Y a man stood and smahed the window wih his fist. Up next he saw how a male ran away. Meanwhile the first man did hold his hand in the way as he would hold a gun, stretched. The witness testified he heard 4-5 shots. At last he saw directly at car X a man and a woman. He watched everything via his rear-view mirror and saw in car Y a man and a woman and in car X two persons as well as a police car nearby. The man with the gun he described as tall and he wore a t-shirt. When he was asked if the shots staved in he replied that he saw nothing, but thinks the shots were aimed at the police. Because of his colourblindness he could say nothing about the color of the car. Up next he explained a sketch at the table of the judge the audience couldn’ see.

2. Witness Second witness was an officer who explained the judge and lawyers pictures of the cars that were involved and their damages. He further said a patrol car was damaged, too.

3. Witness The third witness was a lord high commissioner who did the crime scene in the shop. He made explanations about the photographs.

After judge Nohl wanted to read the DNA-report which compared the salvia sample of the accused persons with the spoors that were found. Gabriels lawyer obejcted against it with the argumentation that with the attached documents it is not understandable how the result of analysis came to happen. He asked for additional material. Further a biyearly certificate acknowledging the correct work of the institute. Afterwards prosecutor Geimer made the application to hear Mrs. Dr. West of the Criminal Investigation Department ’cos she could explain the results. Gabriels lawyer agreed with it.

4. Witness After a break of 15 minutes the fourth witness appeared, Mrs. Schneider, working for the government at the police headquarter in Aachen. She did take Begonias fingerprints and photographs. She testified Begonia was enraged and despite of several indoctrinations regarding the fact that her data will be erased when she is innocent Begonia resisted the treatment. When Begonia asked her to allow her to call her daughter Mrs. Schneider replied she not responsible for that and refered to the official in charge. But she didn’t speak with the official in charge. She can’t remember if Begonia was indoctrinated about what she was charged with. She affirmed when the defense asked her if she talked with her colleagues about the case before the hearing. But what they talked about was just general stuff, nothing in detail. As preparation she read the comment and the reports in the internet.

After a the lunch break that was 45 minutes longer than normal the second part of the day in trial began with Gabriel screaming out lound "SOLIDARIDAD CON MARCO", one of the accused persons of the 129a-trial in Madgeburg who was taken into coercive detention yesterday.

5. Witness Helmut Radermacher, officer in Aachen. Together with his colleague Trapp he rode the patrol car that was following the car used for escape directly. Via radio they got the information from the Markant- gas station a red BMW escaped whereupon several patrol cars began to chase ’em. At the Schell- gas station they met the car used for escape, turned around followed the car directly. It clashed with another car, but drove on. The space behind the escape car was used by a car of the federal border force for a while then, but soon it retreated again. It was getting more and more traffic and close to the court the car had to stop. Thereupon a person sat at the window frame, pulled a gun and shot at them. The same thing happened at the Kaiserplatz and Hansemannplatz. When the car used for escape was driving over a green area at the Bastei the chase ended for them ’cos of the call progress state while the car of the federal border force went on with chasing ’em. After hearing something on radio they went to Halifaxstreet, but left after an hour. When the judge asked him he said that on the backseat of the car he saw several persons and it appeared to him to the person in the middle was pushed down by the one on the right. The shots were fired at very low pace and at a distance of 20-25m with taking aim. He explained it has been always two shots which he heard but he can’t say where it staved in. The shooter he described as a man with dark hair, sunglasses and dark clothes. He didn’t see photographs.

6. Witness Sixt witness was Thomas Trapp, colleague of Radermacher. He confirmed what Radermacher said. Just the distance to the car used for escape was 30-50m in his opinion and became more ’cos of safetey measure after the shots. He had the impression they didn’t just fire at them, but also on another car. He could remember the slim face and the short hair of the shooter as well as a fresh beard and a basecap.

After that the lawyer reads a statement of Gabriel regarding what happened at 28. June 2004. Gabriel declares that he escaped on 28.12.2003 during holiday from arrest and traveled all over europe to do political meetings. He was financed by solidarity. Further he said : "Bart and Begonia didn’t know until what happened in Aachen that Jose and him had weapons with them. They didn’t talk about this ’cos it is none of Begonias and Barts business. Jose and i we were armed ’cos we were escaping. (...) We agreed to use weapons only as a threat, but not to shot at anybody, hurt or kill." The hostage-taking was not arranged and was a result of overreaction. It says further : "Jose and me went through too much in prisons in spain to go back there.", followed by a description of the inhuman conditions of torture and isolation. Incidentally Bart got into the car used for escape only ’cos he asked him to do so and the shots he didn’t do at aim but right into the air and at the tyres and radiator of the car that followed them. The result was the officer escaped. A bank hold-up was never planned ’cos that was neither necessary of financial reasons nor did they want to risk an arrrest.

This statement was giving applause to by the audience in solidarity. Judge Nohl did swing the hammer and initiated to protocol that another applause will result in clearing the court.

What follows is a statement of Begonia that says Begonia wasn’t involved in the bank hold-up in Karlsruhe, didn’t ever speak with Jose about where the money comes from, was not involved in any arrangements regarding crimes and had no knowledge about Jose and Gabriel carrying weapons with ’em.

The question of the judge if Gabriel and Begonia will answer questions was answered by Gabriels defense with that it correlates with the questions. Begonias lawyer retorted only he will give answers after speaking with his client.

After another break the judge read a legal advise concerning which sentence the court takes into consideration, but without explaining the argumentation : The accusation against Bart could be diminished to abetment of taking hostages in coincidence with resistance against executory officers and abetment of bringandish hold-up in coincidence with abetment of aggravated robbery. The accusation murder can be dropped for all accused. What remains for Jose and Gabriel is : Hostage-taking, tried aggravated extortion, resistance against executory officers and assault in coincidence with aggravated attack on a motorist in coincidence with aggravated robbery. Jose will likely be sentenced ’cos of extortion (bank hold-up in Karlsruhe). It is taken into consideration to judge Begonia ’cos of fencing ’cos of the assumption that she was well aware of the fact she had stolen money with her.

After that Nohl read the opinion of expert Baum regarding the weapons and ammo. A weapon was found (what follows are technical details), 2 parts of the ammo, 5 capsules and a revolver (again technical details). He declares both weapons had been operative and the number of the weapons had been deleted. The capsules can be assigned with the shots from the revolver.

Up next he paid attention to the criminal record of the accused. Gabriel, Jose and Bart had no record in germany at all. Begonia had to take responsibility for several things, for instance driving without having a license, driving without having an insurrance, fraud in two cases (fuel oil she could never pay, leaving a gas station without paying), gaining benefits by trickery (using the metro without having a ticket) and endangering road traffic with insult.

After that the prosecutor raised his voice and applied to read the expert opinion the defense objected to before, to not hear another witness about what happened at the shop and the closing of argument. The defense insisted on hearing the witness and again demanded to control the DNA-opinion. Judge Nohl declared Mrs. Dr. West will come on friday to explain everything.

After that he asked the defense and the prosecutor if the final speeches can be made on friday. The defense negated this and the prosecutor said that he will wait for the end of the argumentation.

After all he replied to Barts application to release him from jail. He is rejecting it ’cos Bart is still under criminal suspicion and there is a danger for escape. When Barts lawyer asked him if he could explain his decision he said "We announce decisions but we don’t explain them."

Barts lawyer read another application regarding the passing-on of post by the defense that should be passed on unchecked. A control is only okay when there a doubts about the sender.

Inspite of the objections of the defense Nohl announced the results of the DNA-opinion. Saliva samples were taken by all four accused person and compared with with spoores of all the stuff they had with ’em as well as cigarette ends and drinks. Various items and clothings were assigned with her owners.

The reading of that document the defense saw as a breach with the duty of disclosure. Joses lawyer declared further Joses date of birth was wrong on the expert opinion and Begonias lawyer announced Begonia had nothing to do with the hang that was assigned to her by the DNA-analysis. The application for passing on the mail of the defense was accepted by the judge.

Next day of the trial is friday, 29.04.2005