THE RUDOLF REPORT

11. HUNTING GERMAR RUDOLFhow the Remer operation came about is a particularly clear indicationthat he was involved in the Remer operation.”2. The Court was also eager to try to prove that I did tell my sisterabout Remer’s commentary before Remer had even started to distributemy report, which would have been possible only if I had been involvedin the production of said commentary. The first copies of myreport mailed out by Remer arrived at their destinations briefly afterEaster 1993. Did I tell my sister already before Easter about thesecomments, then this would put a ‘nail into my coffin’. According tothe above-mentioned independent observer, the sister of the accusedmade the following statement on January 24, 1995:“The sister of the accused states that she learned from her brotherduring a visit shortly before Easter 1993 (April 10-12, 1993), that Remerhad joined a racist and anti-Semitic commentary to the expert report,which he had obtained from his attorney, and distributed it against hiswill. In this connection there was talk [between my sister and me] of ameasure against Remer at one time. The inquiry, whether her brother describedthe Remer operation as a threatening event or as a completedhappening, she could not answer because she could not remember. It waspossible that the operation had already happened. Actually she had spokenwith her brother on this subject numerous times since there had beentelephone communications between them once a fortnight. Under intensivequestioning by the court about details of content and chronology ofthe events at that time, the witness appeared stressed and appreciablyabashed. On inquiry of her brother she said she could no longer rememberexactly when she had heard what news from her brother on this subject.She could only describe her overall impression.”The court described this witness statement as follows (p. 210):“Moreover the sister of the accused said he had expressed to her alreadyin Easter 1993 (April 11/12, 1993) the intention to follow theRemer version with an ‘authorized’ version. The reason he had givenwas that Remer had scattered racist expressions through the ‘expert report’.But in his testimony the accused says he saw the Remer versionfirst from his doctoral supervisor on 16th April 1993 and first knew ofthe Remer additions at that time. The fact that he referred to Remer’s‘racist expressions’ previous to this is a further indication that the accusedhad knowledge of the Remer operation beforehand.”However, according to the independent observer, my sisterthought “it was possible” that Remer’s mailout had already taken place335