Germar Rudolf Prison Update
17 January 2006
Comments on Germar Rudolf’s Imprisonment at Stammheim
1. It has to be remembered that
the German judiciary is not aloof and apart from the public, as is often the
case within Common Law countries. In Common Law countries the judges’ role is to
arbitrate between two competing counsels, one for the prosecution and one for
the defence. This is the adversarial system of justice, and the prime example of
how such system works at its worse was shown to the world when O J Simpson was
put on trial for murder – and won because he could afford to pay millions to
mount an elaborate defence.
2. I am reminded how Professor
Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books, mounted a multi-million
dollar defence against David Irving’s libel action against Lipstadt. Irving had
no chance of successfully running such a prosecution case on his own. Justice
Gray had to weigh up each argument presented to him and then make a decision as
to who was best at presenting his case. Judges are loathe to find in favour of
legally unrepresented litigants because usually from such presentations no firm
case law can emerge. I personally once ran my own appeal in a court and won -
but then that case remained an unreported appeal case.
3. The German-European system of
justice is known as the inquisitorial system whereby judges actively engage in
the process of finding the truth of a matter. This means that when an individual
is on remand the judge assigned to the case is responsible for censoring all in-
and outgoing mail.
4. High profile prisoners on
remand such as Ernst Zündel and Germar Rudolf - and David Irving in Austria –
who receive dozens of pieces of mail a week present a work-problem for judges.
5. It does not help in any way
to protest at the long delay in mail delivery because often the judge has only
one assistant who personally has to take a prisoner’s mail to the post office.
When I was in Mannheim prison in 1999 I initially sulked when my judge, Klaus
Kern, advised me that he was imposing a limit upon my outgoing mail. He
explained to me that he simply did not have the time to post all my outgoing
letters, nor did he have the time to censor all incoming letters. A couple of
times I was handed unopened letters wherein individuals had enclosed money. I
used such notes as birthday presents for fellow prisoners. Though I was never
advised formally it was not permitted to have actual physical money in prison.
Going shopping at the prison supermarket was a mere signature affair – the total
sum being deducted from your prison account.
6. Once an accused becomes a
sentenced prisoner the situation eases and incoming mail is generally uncensored
and always handed out immediately. Although Germar Rudolf is a sentenced
prisoner at Stammheim, Stuttgart, his situation is more involved than Ernst
Zündel’s case which is set down to begin again at Mannheim on February 2006.
7. In addition to being a
sentenced prisoner, Germar is also on remand for a forthcoming trial at
Mannheim. His current 14-month imprisonment stems from a sentence imposed on him
by a Stuttgart court during the 1990s.
8. Once he has served this
sentence, he is faced with further charges stemming from his having operated his
Internet website in the USA, and thereon spreading the Revisionist message.
Again, the 2000 appeal in my own case created world legal history when the
Karlsruhe court ruled that German law does grip overseas and can pursue anyone
anywhere in the world for spreading the Revisionist message via the Internet.
The argument that German law should limit itself to Germany only was rejected on
grounds that the ‘crime’ is committed wherever the Internet is accessed. Such
mindset refused to accept the more logical personal volition argument that
Internet access is an activity that an individual engages in voluntarily – the
9. Internet traffic is not
‘pushing’ material into an individual’s mind because an individual must actively
look for material. Spam emails seem to water down this argument somewhat whereby
unsolicited material is received. But this is certainly not the case with
websites, though there is that flimsy excuse used in the Federal Court of
Australia case against me where it was stated that students browsing or Googling
accidentally stumble on to Adelaide Institute’s website and are then ‘upset and
offended’ by the material they find there.
10. This reminds me of the
elderly lady who rushes into the local police station to complain about a man
doing ‘dirty things’. When asked where, she replied that it was in her home. An
officer accompanied her to her home and found no-one there. She then beckoned
him to accompany her to the bathroom, asked him to stand on a chair, then to
look out the small window, across the road and into the neighbour’s home where
“a man was doing dirty things”.
Public Prosecutor, Andreas Großmann, with whom I spoke per telephone today to
confirm some of the matters mentioned herein - Germany 49 + 6212922334 - advised
that Germar’s mail is being censored by Amtsgericht Judge Reemer at Mannheim.
This means that any mail sent to Germar at Stammheim is re-directed to Mannheim,
and then forwarded on to him at Stammheim, Stuttgart.
12. Germar is also not permitted
to receive or to make any telephone calls, though I think he can communicate
with his lawyer per phone.
13. He can receive only two
half-hour visits per month, and these are controlled by the State Prosecutor’s
Office - Staatsanwaltschaft - at Stuttgart.
14. Germar is permitted to
receive unlimited mail, and stamps or international postal coupons can be
enclosed in letters.
15. Within one 12-month period
Germar is permitted to receive only three packets – one of choice, one for
Easter and one for Christmas. Any other packets are returned to the sender. This
imposed limitation makes it imperative that his family has precedent over anyone
else sending packets to Germar.
16. Germar can receive any
number of books, periodicals, newspapers, CDs, etc – but they have to be sent directly
to him from the publishers.
17. He can play CDs, and they
can be sent to him per two firms in Stuttgart,
Buch& Musik, Häberlinstr. 1-3, 70563 Stuttgart
Weltbild Verlag, Steinerne Furt 70, 86131 Augsburg
18. As a prisoner on remand he
is permitted to spend 150 Euro per month in the prison supermarket.
19. Note: Germar Rudolf does not
wish any money to be transferred to his prison account - and he does not wish
anyone to collect money on his behalf, nor does he wish anyone to send him money
per mail in prison. Any donations - cheques or cash - should be sent to
20. The above matter is
controlled by the prison administration - JVA-Zentrale Stuttgart: Germany 49+711
Germar is coping as well as can
be expected and he sends his regards to all those who have sent him letters of
It is still best to write to
Germar at the following address:
Herrn Germar Rudolf
NB: Information also
supplied by Günter Deckert