



	Home About Die Bürgerstimme Contact Deutsch

The get-out-of-jail-free card for all of us from the blind prosecutor – Never again face prosecution or pay fines.

Some of you might remember that I not only filed a motion for disqualification against the unnamed judge (judge at the district court in Weißenfels), but also a complaint for judicial bias. What this judge did, in my opinion, was simply too much of the bad.

Last week, I received the letter from the public prosecutor's office (see below), and what can I say? Once again, it is clear that inclusion is a top priority at the prosecutor's office – because even Prosecutor Cernota seems to have at least a significant visual impairment, unless he is completely blind.

But we should not always see everything in such a negative light. Even from such responses, we can draw a lot of positives, right? We just need to apply this consistently in our daily lives and enforce it with authorities and offices. Isn't it said: Equal rights for all?

The Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card for All of Us

There is reassuring news for all citizens of this country: We can now stop worrying about offenses or even crimes. Because if even a judge, who "consciously and seriously deviates from the law and justice," is not held accountable, then there seems to be nothing left for any of us to fear.

But it is understandable why the prosecutor's office can't see anything in such cases: It is clearly suffering from acute blindness, a form of selective blindness that prevents it from recognizing "sufficient factual evidence" of a crime. Just like a mole avoids daylight, the prosecutor’s office apparently avoids incriminating facts. Perhaps it’s because Justice traditionally wears a blindfold. Here, however, it seems to have tightened hers particularly firmly.

But why should we limit this new, revolutionary viewpoint only to criminal law? It is time for the rest of everyday life to be permeated by this groundbreaking insight.

The School System: Never Again Wrong Answers!

If a student claims that 2 + 2 = 5 in a math test, this is not a wrong answer, but simply an unusual exercise of discretion. A mere "incorrect application" of mathematical principles is not a reason to consider the answer wrong. After all, only a "serious and deliberate deviation from the applicable school rules" should be sanctioned. And who can definitively determine that?

The same goes for dictations: Whether a word is written "cow" or "qh" is ultimately just a matter of interpretation. As long as the student does not commit "elementary violations" of grammar, the grade is just a formality.

The Workday: Wrong Decisions? Never!

A doctor who casts the left arm instead of a broken leg? A car mechanic who replaces motor oil with orange juice? A bank clerk who makes an international transfer instead of to the correct account? No problem at all! As long as no "elementary violations" of professional ethics can be proven, there is no issue. A small "procedural mistake" is no reason for alarm.

And what about the architect who "deliberately and seriously" deviates from building regulations? Don’t worry! Even if the house collapses, it’s just a somewhat creative interpretation of structural laws. After all, theoretically, everything could have gone well!

Road Traffic: Rules? Just a Guide!

Let’s say someone drives at 120 km/h through a 30 km/h zone in the city center and runs a red light. According to the new legal insights, this is not a problem, as long as the driver does not "deliberately and seriously" violate the road traffic regulations. A simple procedural error during braking is no reason to impose sanctions. One must always make a "value-based overall assessment of all objective and subjective circumstances" before hastily imposing fines.

Politics: Long Live the New Irresponsibility!

If a politician breaks a campaign promise or spends taxpayer money on obscure projects, we should not hastily interpret this as misuse. Instead, we should wait for the "value-based overall assessment of all objective and subjective circumstances." After all, a "mere procedural error" is not the same as an actual wrong decision.

The New Freedom!

Thanks to the wisdom of the prosecutor, we can all finally go through life feeling free. If even the obvious disregard for laws is classified as "not serious," then there is probably no reason for us regular citizens to worry anymore. Wrong answers, wrong diagnoses, wrong decisions – it’s all just a matter of interpretation. And if anyone thinks a line has been crossed: don’t worry, there won’t be any "concrete evidence"!

The Letter from Prosecutor Cernota as an Argumentation Aid

Your complaint against Mr. Judge at the District Court Berg

Charge: Judicial Bias

Dear Mr. Thurm,

I have reviewed your criminal complaint dated November 29, 2024, concerning case 723 Js 208673/24, but I see no grounds for initiating an investigation, as there is insufficient initial suspicion of a prosecutable crime.

An initial suspicion in accordance with § 152 (2) StPO requires that there be sufficient factual evidence of the existence of a crime. This means that based on objective facts, there must be specific evidence of a criminal act. Mere assumptions, general suspicions, or unsubstantiated claims are not sufficient for this. These requirements are not met in your submission. Your criminal complaint does not indicate any specific crime.

In your complaint, you criticize the handling of a fine case as legally flawed and accuse the responsible judge, in particular, of judicial bias, obstruction of justice, suppression of evidence, and coercion.

According to § 339 StGB, a judge or official is punished if they "make themselves guilty of bending the law to the benefit or detriment of a party when leading or deciding a case." According to consistent case law of the Federal Court of Justice, this provision does not only cover elementary legal violations, but requires that the judge or official consciously and seriously deviates from the law and justice in favor of or against a party and bases their actions on their own standards rather than legal requirements. A mere incorrect application of the law or faulty exercise of discretion does not fulfill the offense, even if the decision appears untenable. Whether there is an elementary legal violation must be determined through a value-based overall assessment of all objective and subjective circumstances. Procedural errors only lead to the charge of judicial bias if they result in a concrete danger of an incorrect decision, although actual harm is not required.

In this case, no such serious violations of substantive or procedural rules are apparent. As for your criticism of recording and documentation duties, no procedural errors can be identified. Moreover, these are not elementary legal violations that could constitute judicial bias. The shorter deadline for filing a disqualification request, as granted, does not justify this accusation. Such a request would only be justified if the deadline was obviously unreasonable or arbitrary, which is not the case here.

Since the behavior of the accused does not meet the statutory requirements for judicial bias, there is also no criminal liability for obstruction of justice under §§ 258a, 258 StGB or other criminal provisions. In this respect, § 339 StGB has a blocking effect according to case law.

For these reasons, an investigation will not be initiated.

Sincerely

(Signature) Cernota
Senior Public Prosecutor

Author: Michael Thurm | 01.04.2025

Jeden Tag neue Angebote bis zu 70 Prozent reduziert

Other articles:

Das große Interesse der Kasper-Frösche und ihre Unfähigkeit zu differenzieren

Die Überschrift hätte auch lauten können: Die Angst vor Demokratie und Meinungsfreiheit und ähnliches, die die Kasper-Frösche einmal mehr zur Schau stellten.... zum Artikel

Eine Reise in die Vergangenheit: Entdecken Sie Weißenfels in der DDR-Zeit! Ein faszinierender Rückblick durch historische Bilder.

Weißenfels in der DDR im Sozialismus! Erleben Sie die Stadt durch eine beeindruckende Sammlung historischer Bilder.... zum Artikel

Ist der Burgenlandkreis, unser Bundesland, die Bundesrepublik Deutschland totalitär?

Kritiker würden diese Frage ganz klar mit Ja beantworten. Doch was denken Nicht-Kritiker? Auf der Website der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung wird Totalitarismus beschriebe... 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