Resistance

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORYrecognized,” it is advised that the Chamber considers that the systematicmass murder against Jews, committed primarily in gas chambersof concentration camps during World War II, is self-evident asa historical fast (see BGH NStz 1994, 140; BGHSt 40, 97).The motions under no. 2 to 5 of the annex are rejected, because theCourt has no obligation to give further information beyond that. Inaddition, it is remarked regarding the motion no. 4 (of annex 6) thatthe Chamber has taken note of the essay during the defendant’sstatements. The motion to read it is to be rejected not least becausethe Chamber already has knowledge of the victim numbers mentionedin it due to the defendant’s statements.4. The defendant’s motions of 12 Feb. 2007 (annex 7) that the courtmay consider as true that writings, as defined by the law, which fulfillthe formal criteria of being scientific and which are therefore apart of science itself, automatically serve research and/or science,and that writings, as defined by the law, which fulfill the formal criteriaonly partly or not at all, can nonetheless – under circumstancesyet to be determined – serve research and/or science, is rejected, becauseonly factual claims can be considered true and because judgingthe scientific nature of a writing is a matter of evidentiary assessmentand a question of law.5. The defendant’s motions of 12 Feb. 2007 (annex 8) to summon theexpert witness Dr. Hoyer is rejected, because the Chamber can assessthe allegations mentioned by its own expertise.[…]CommentsRudolf’s motions to consider certain matters of law as true served todraw the court’s and the public’s attention to the facts stated in them,even though they were inadmissible on formal grounds. Later on theywould have been complemented by corresponding motions to assess thequestion whether the writings contained in the indictment serve researchand science, quite independent of whether they themselves are scientific.Due to the abrupt end of the proceedings, though, only some ofthese motions were filed (see Appendix 7, p. 339).237