Letter from Munich – 037
Letter from Munich – the Joseph Affair – 37
EINE DEUTSCHE FASSUNG STEHT WEITER UNTEN.
21 September 2001
Dear Mr. Graf, dear friends,
Alexandra seemed to be beaming with satisfaction. “You see?” she said. “I was right. They’ve started harassing you. They’ll make you regret you ever started writing any of your stupid letters. In Germany you cannot criticize authority the way you have in this Joseph affair and expect to get away with it.”
“I don’t know what you’re talking about,” I answered.
She laughed. “I mean the articles, that the lecturer in English at the Technische Universitaet Muenchen sent to you. Most people would find those articles insulting.”
“He was only kidding. He did it only in fun. He was surely joking.”
“Harassment always begins with that kind of joking,” she replied. “And you should stop these things as soon as they start. That kind of harassment has no place in any university, and certainly not in Germany.”
“Alexandra, you’re always exaggerating,” I said quietly. “The whole thing is getting blown out of all proportion.”
She seemed not to hear me. “But what I really don’t understand,” she went on, “is why this lecturer would harass and insult someone like you. Doesn’t that violate not just standards of politeness and good taste, but also German law? You’re not an employee of the university but a freelance instructor, paid by the hour. This lecturer, on the other hand, is permanently employed by the university, and even though he often criticizes his supervisor, just as he criticizes everyone behind their back, I hope his supervisor will finally recognize the truth of what’s going on and take some effective steps to stop it. And if this lecturer continues to insist that he was only joking, then he should be extremely careful with such jokes, because they could have unintended consequences for him.”
I shook my head. Maybe I’m nothing more than a naive old man, but I have to say that everything Alexandra said sounded absolutely ridiculous.
Actually, Alexandra’s ridiculous ideas about the lecturer in Englisch at the TU-Munich were not what I wanted to speak with her about today. What I really wanted to discuss was a transcript of the questioning by a judge of a witness in the investigation into the death of the child Joseph. (A copy of the transcript was recently given to me. It was assigned the following two file numbers by the district court in Dresden: 270 Gs 3141/00 and 414 Js 53329/00.) The questioning took place on 16 October 2000 in Dresden and began at seven minutes past one o’clock in the afternoon. Those present are listed on the cover of the transcript as: District Court Judge Weidig, District Attorney Flockerzy, and Court Reporter Koedel, as well as the witness, Rene May. According to the information in the transcript, the witness was born on 20 May 1985 in Sebnitz, currently resides in that town, and is a pupil in the ninth grade. The transcript begins with the standard formula: “The witness was informed of the object of the investigation. He was admonished to tell the truth and was made aware of his right to remain silent under German law (Para. 52 I StPO) if he was a relative of the accused. . . . The witness was also informed that his statement could have the force of sworn testimony. He was advised of the significance of an oath taken before the court, . . . as well as of the fact that under German law (Para. 153 – 155 StGB) a false or incomplete statement before the court was punishable offense.”
Since there was no more time today, Alexandra and I postponed our discussion of this transcript. I will cite its contents in the letter I write next week.
Sincerely yours,
Robert John Bennett
Mauerkircherstrasse 68
81925 Germany
Telephone: +49.89.981.0208
