Ageexpert forentik professor takes back first expertise on scars made by his Institut, puting the mistake on the acused.
The expert on deciding the age of minors Prof Puschel direktor of the forentik institut in the University Hospital in Hamburg, famous for his colonialistik methods of expertising the age of young people, talked after having checked the one acused in his body to experise if the scars he has, have been produced by shootings. The check up made last saturday, again without any translator, "proved" that all scars are not produced by shooting. So the first expertise made by the same institut two years ago, is proved false.It sayd that it was scars from gunshooting,
Now the professor says its the mistake of the acused himself, saying that actually he himself only had signed the expertise but one of his young kollegues made it and he presumes that the kollege wrote what the acused told him: that it was scars from gun shootings. Last saturday the acused (without translator) told him: the scars come from car accidents and skin diceases..
Court discusses if the talking between prosecutor and acused, that resuleted to even more acusations of all other acused people made by the key witness, is part of this trial. They havent come to a finnal decision but explained very clearly their thoughts about it.If the acused is not willing to answer questions about this talk, then the prosecutor will be asked questions by the court!
The acused in his talk with the prosecutor acused others of hijaking the mothership Hutrut and other ships before. Also he acused others of having taken the indian fisher of the Hutrut as hostage.
But taking hostages doesnt belong to the prinizips trialed in Weltrecht.(World right?)
This court can only judge about the assault of Taipan , said the judge. This was the delivery reason of the 10 acused.
All other acusations might be relevant for the german justice, but judging this should be done by another court.
Taking Hostages is a strong criminal act in german justice system, but doesnt belong the the WELTRECHT prizip, so its not this courts responsability. All this thoughts are spoken in court but nor written (mündliche vorläufige einschätzung).
Then the judge explained that the concurrance of offences is not fullfiled, because there was a longer time between the diferent actions, which the acusing acused, talked to the prosecutor.
The acused, who is since sometime acusing everybody else, and one might get the impression that he is cooperating with the prosecutor, had anouced that he wants to make a statement about the facts two other people said about him, his naming false names and the fact that he belongs to well known family of pirates.
But then sudenly he decided not to make a statement but "only" answer questions .
Which was not much better. He rejected all acusations and informations, the two lawyers had said about his real identity, using always the same argument: all other acused (whom he has named and acused ) lie because all are against him.
Of great interest was the fact that he was able to name all birthplaces of all other 9 acused people in full detail and also the places they used to live before going to the Taipan !
