Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE!
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
||
Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE! | ||
|
|
||
Eric Stehr (Die Linke) fights against freedom of the press and art and has already conceded his election to the state parliament?If you run a critical medium that scrutinizes the political conditions in the country, you will always come under fire from time to time. Eric Stehr (Die Linke), who is currently running for the state parliament in Saxony-Anhalt, has also brought out the heavy artillery. 
So he commissioned the Düsseldorf lawyer Dr. Jasper Prigge to take action against two publications on buergerstimme.net. At least lawyer Prigge claims to represent Eric Stehr. A power of attorney was not enclosed with his letter dated 10 August 2026. I have already been through one or two legal skirmishes in my life and therefore always take a closer look. A lawyer who claims – sorry: solemnly affirms as a lawyer – to represent someone but does not transmit a power of attorney is, in my opinion, doing a very poor job professionally. For the cease-and-desist declaration that I am supposed to submit to Eric Stehr, he gives the address of the law firm. I wonder whether Eric Stehr has moved his residence to Düsseldorf. Wink! Eric Stehr (Die Linke) fights against freedom of the press and artThe accusation made by lawyer Prigge concerns alleged deepfakes in two articles on buergerstimme.net. According to this, Eric Stehr has no objection to the texts. It is the “images” that he dislikes. On the one hand the picture in the article “Hot battle at the lampposts – Does the election poster really decide?” and on the other in the article “Wheelchair users are also Nazis – according to Eric Stehr (Die Linke) and Andreas Heidrich (Wir Wißenfelser)?”. I would not call these deepfakes, but rather satire and art. Lawyer Prigge writes: “He (Eric Stehr) neither sat with a shovel in the sandpit, nor did he stand behind two wheelchair users in Nazi attire.”Does Eric Stehr consider the citizens in his constituency to be stupid?Since lawyer Prigge admits in his letter that Eric Stehr was neither photographed in the sandpit nor behind wheelchair users in Nazi attire, the inevitable question arises whether lawyer Prigge and his client (if he is indeed his client) consider the citizens in the district to be so stupid that they would not recognise that these are image manipulations. In the article with the wheelchair users, the video clip by and with Eric Stehr is additionally embedded, allowing every reader to ascertain that no wheelchair users in Nazi attire were present. The direct comparison is immediately possible for everyone. I also assume that there is hardly anyone out there who believes that Eric Stehr had himself photographed in the sandpit in that manner. Lawyer Prigge and Eric Stehr apparently see it differently and believe that people and possibly Stehr’s potential voters lack the necessary intellect to recognise this, even though the articles are also clearly satirical in nature. For Prigge and Stehr, a justification under § 23 KUG does not apply.Reaching into the mothballed boxLawyer Prigge argues with the right to one’s own image and cites a judgment from 1966. Yes, indeed, Prigge has to go that far back to find something. In the cited judgment “BGH, GRUR 1966, 102 – Spielgefährtin I” it concerns a woman who had contact with a politician, was photographed with him, and this photo was published in the then Stern magazine. This woman did not regard herself as a public figure nor as a person of contemporary history. She wanted to remain unknown. The judgment at the time was in her favour.In Eric Stehr’s case the situation is obviously different. For years he has been posting information about himself and photos of his face on his social media channels such as Facebook. He had himself elected to the city council of Weißenfels. He organises demonstrations and appears as a speaker. He gives video interviews and posts them on his social media profiles as well. He is running in the state election on 6 September 2026 and posted happily that large-format posters featuring him recognisably are now on display. Stehr had a website of his own with his name as the domain put online especially for himself. He is therefore unmistakably seeking the public eye and most definitely wants – there is no other way to interpret it – to be a person of contemporary history. Recently an article appeared in the Mitteldeutsche Zeitung in which Stehr explained that there are even video deepfakes of him online. It is suspected that Russian actors are behind them. I ask myself why Russian actors would act in this way against a person like Eric Stehr if Stehr were not a public figure. If it really is “the Russian”, then Eric Stehr must have built up a truly substantial public presence over the past years. Has Eric Stehr already conceded his election?Lawyer Prigge insists that Stehr has a right to his own image because he is allegedly not a public figure and not a person of contemporary history – not even of temporary contemporary history – like the woman mentioned in the 1966 judgment, or does not want to be one. But if that is the case, why is Stehr himself so active online? Why does he stand for elections? Why does he show his face in public? Why does he want to be elected to the state parliament if, according to the lawyer’s argument, he actually wants to be an unknown person who should not be recognised in public? I do not find the argumentation particularly coherent.Unless Eric Stehr has already conceded his election to the state parliament or does not want to be elected at all. But why did he not inform his party “Die Linke” of this in advance? The election posters and campaigns for Eric Stehr certainly cost several thousand euros, which would then be money down the drain if Stehr fundamentally does not want to sit in the state parliament. Perhaps his party should discuss this with him. The vague cease-and-desist undertakingLawyer Prigge demands submission of a penalised cease-and-desist declaration by 14 August 2026. However, his proposal is worded so vaguely that for “every case of culpable infringement” I would have to pay a “contractual penalty, the amount of which is to be determined by the creditor of the cease-and-desist at its reasonable discretion”. Eric Stehr would thus be free to invent what would constitute an infringement in future and how much money he would like to receive. Entirely as it suits him, according to whim and mood, depending on the day of the week or how well he slept.The 20,000-euro claim for damages and the 1,372.78-euro invoiceDr. Jasper Prigge seamlessly integrated an invoice into his letter which he wants paid by 24 August 2026. He plucked an alleged claim for damages of 20,000 euros out of thin air and turned it, including value-added tax (yes, the state always has its hand out there too), into a sum of 1,372.78 euros. Interestingly, he claims a postal and telecommunications flat rate of 20 euros. His letter was sent by e-mail. The post was therefore not involved. No one called me either. But hey, when there is money to be made, lawyer Prigge does not seem to be petty.Transmission of the cease-and-desist undertaking by e-mail or fax is not sufficient for lawyer Prigge, however. He absolutely wants it delivered by post as well. Will Eric Stehr go to court?In view of the facts I reject both the payment and the submission of a cease-and-desist declaration. Without a power of attorney signed by Eric Stehr I doubt that lawyer Dr. Jasper Prigge has taken on the legal representation at all. He is therefore first obliged to transmit such a power of attorney.Furthermore, his client Eric Stehr (if Eric Stehr is his client at all) has not observed the duty to mitigate damages, which is explicitly pointed out in the imprint. Before Eric Stehr sends a lawyer into action, he himself should have sought contact in order to clarify any circumstances. Consequently he has to bear his own legal costs. If Eric Stehr does not now want to pay his lawyer out of his own pocket, he will have to go to court in the hope that the court follows the view of lawyer Prigge and holds that Eric Stehr, despite his constant public appearances, is not a public figure and not a person of contemporary history. In my opinion that would be extremely difficult to demonstrate. Is Eric Stehr an antifascist antidemocrat?From my point of view Eric Stehr, who is always keen to talk about diversity, tolerance and so on, joins the ranks of those who have not understood democracy and try to bring critical media to their knees with such cost demands. Mention should be made in this connection of the widely beloved district administrator Götz Ulrich (CDU), who prohibits video recordings of district council committee meetings without justifying this properly on factual and legal grounds. The district administrator’s view is that as a citizen one can file a lawsuit against such arbitrary decisions. Mention should also be made of the widely beloved chairman of the Weißenfels city council Ekkart Günther (CDU), who took legal action against the publication of a video recording of a city council meeting but then lacked the courage to appear at the oral hearing. His lawyer also distinguished himself by his absence.Perhaps through his action against buergerstimme.net Eric Stehr is recommending himself for an early entry into the CDU. Before he joined “Die Linke” he was a member of the party “Die Partei”. The new future political home could therefore also be the CDU. The CDU is antidemocratic enough in any case. Wait and see and drink teaI am waiting to see whether anything further comes from lawyer Prigge or his client Eric Stehr. The cost risk is initially borne by Eric Stehr. He has to file a lawsuit. In his place I would think very carefully whether the argumentation of lawyer Jasper Prigge with his LL.M. (Master of Laws) is coherent enough and will also stand up in court. A person who constantly and persistently seeks the public eye, is politically active and wants to be elected to the state parliament can hardly insist on remaining unknown and unrecognisable nonetheless.In this connection the song by Danger Dan comes to mind, which has been posted from time to time in one exchange or another on Facebook where people from the left spectrum and the circle of government loyalists have called me a “Nazi”, “brown arsehole”, “kerb-licker” and other “niceties”. In the said song it says: “Report me and I’ll open a bottle of champagne. All of this is covered by artistic freedom.” Mention should also be made of the statement by the widely beloved still-serving Minister-President Sven Schulze (CDU): “Art needs freedom, not approval. Freedom of opinion does not show itself where everyone is of the same opinion, but where we can contradict one another and still remain in conversation with each other.” The question is therefore how things stand with Eric Stehr’s (Die Linke) understanding of democracy. Will he go to court and thereby show that freedom of the press and art are a thorn in his side? Or will he let it rest and look for ways to remunerate his lawyer for his efforts? I do find 1,372.78 euros rather expensive for this “service”, however. Coercion and extortion by Eric Stehr and his lawyer Prigge?I have called upon lawyer Prigge to transmit a signed power of attorney by 17 August 2026, 12 noon. I assume that owing to the geographical distance between Düsseldorf and Weißenfels he does not have such a power of attorney. Even if a power of attorney were available, I regard this conduct as coercion (the very short deadlines as well as the threat of court proceedings) and extortion (the lawyer wants money), for it is obvious that Eric Stehr wants to be a well-known person of contemporary history. A media lawyer ought to be able to recognise this. Laws are not a one-way street.Law firm for left-wing activists?Interesting are the statements by Prigge on his homepage such as: “We enforce freedom of opinion and of the press in practice.” And further: “Criticism is indispensable for a democracy, but increasingly people react with formal warnings and injunctions.” In the case of Bürgerstimme he seems to want to make an exception, or rather he positions himself on the side of those issuing the warnings. One has to be flexible, doesn’t one?Also to be found on his homepage is his guiding principle: “A democratic, social and ecological society. We consistently reject mandates that do not fit our values. Whether camaraderie, AfD or lateral thinkers – we do not represent right-wing persons or organisations.” That closes the circle. Like many from the left, government-loyal spectrum, Prigge indiscriminately lumps a very large number of people together and displays his activist attitude. And the state election voters?The voters who will decide who is to represent them in the forthcoming state parliament of Saxony-Anhalt may ponder whether they want to be represented by a person who allegedly wants to be “unknown” and “invisible”. A person who sends a lawyer after critical media even though this person otherwise attaches so much importance to tolerance, diversity and freedom of opinion. A person who in my view fulfils criminal offences such as coercion and extortion.The party “Die Linke” may consider whom it has sent into the race for the state election and whether it wants to tolerate such anti-democratic aspirations, coupled with what in my opinion is criminal conduct. Author: AI-Translation - Michael Thurm | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Criminal Organization Still Active NationwideProsecutors do not investigate because they are bound by orders! Judges controlled by politics! Media corrupted!... zum Artikel |
 | Opinion Liberation - How Can This Goal Be Achieved as Quickly as Possible?There are times when one must seriously ask: Why do we even need opinions? Aren’t they just disruptive, slowing progress, and confusing the average citizen? Fortunately, our belo... zum Artikel |
 | Democracy Was Shown the Door – Experience Report on the 10th Democracy Conference in Burgenlandkreis on April 25, 2024A critical review from a participant of the 10th Democracy Conference was submitted to buergerstimme.net and is published here.... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |