Sixteen payments, received by Reiner Fuellmich’s law firm from 18 March 2021 to 4 July 2022, constitute the sixteen charges in a new criminal trial against the co-founder of the German information platform Corona Ausschuss (Corona Investigative Committee, CA). Such was the verdict of the Higher Regional Court in Braunschweig, on 5 November.
CA’s international popularity peaked in the period July 2020 – September 2022, as it became a go-to for people who questioned the official Covid-19 narrative and other ‘Great Reset’ propaganda. Fuellmich, together with Viviane Fischer, the second of four co-founders, was the driving force behind the countless interviews with critical scientists and other experts. CA attracted several hundred thousand viewers from all over the (western) world and received more than €3 million in donations.
The sixteen charges were part of a total of eighteen accusations, two of which (charges 1 and 4) form the subject of the current criminal proceedings against Fuellmich. The Göttingen chamber of five judges had dismissed the sixteen charges on 3 January 2024, at the beginning of the current proceedings, on the grounds that Fuellmich had had the authority to instruct the CA-bookkeeper to pay his law firm (€565,250 in total), for work his associates had carried out for the information platform.
It was, in fact, the third time the charges were dismissed. Even before the indictment was submitted on 2 September 2022, the sixteen accusations – although more densely worded – had been rejected by the Chief Public Prosecutor in Göttingen and, subsequently, by a Public Prosecutor in Berlin. Both ruled that the payments seemed to facilitate the realisation of CA’s objectives and therefore constituted no crime.
Desperate Measures
The ruling by the Higher Regional Court comes at a time when it has become abundantly clear, that the current two charges of embezzlement (of €200,000 and €500,000) no longer stand, even though the judges maintain otherwise.
As transpired during the hearings, the money was transferred to Fuellmich as loans, for which written agreements had been drawn up and co-signed by the bookkeeper and Vivian Fischer. The loans were a way to keep a large part of the incoming donations safe from the German government, who had already blocked or confiscated accounts of other critics of the Covid measurements.
Fuellmich invested the loans in his house, which he was intending to sell. During the sales transaction, in the autumn of 2022 and unbeknown to Fuellmich, most of the proceedings were unlawfully rerouted to lawyer Marcel Templin. On top of the €700,000, Templin secured an additional €458,250, coincidentally just about the total amount of the sixteen payments, making it impossible for Fuellmich to repay the loan(s).
As if clinging to the last straw, the chamber, however, still holds on to the claim that Fuellmich is guilty of embezzlement, merely because the loans were paid into personal accounts. The loan agreements and the fact that Fuellmich had been able to pay the money back (as Chair Carsten Schindler has acknowledged), had he not been robbed, seems to make no difference.
Templin runs the Berlin-based law firm Hafenanwälte with two of the other three CA co-founders, Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffman. The three ‘Harbour lawyers’ are the instigators of the criminal proceedings against Reiner Fuellmich, although Templin was never part of Corona Ausschuss. Unlike his two colleagues, Templin has not been heard as a witness during the ongoing criminal trial, despite multiple requests from Fuellmich’s lawyers.
Full Term Verdict
The fact that the Higher Regional Court took nine months to come to a decision (they received the appeal from Public Prosecutor Simon Philip John, on 29 January 2024) gives the impression that the verdict was kept in store, until a strategic moment, like the impending failure of the first trial.
The verdict, incidentally, caused little uproar: it was published, perhaps deliberately, on 6 November, and got lost in the tumultuous coverage surrounding the outcome of the US elections.
Ground Hog Day
Braunschweig’s ruling effectively puts Fuellmich back to square one. While the charges in the upcoming criminal case concern a different type of payment, the accusation (and criminalisation of Fuellmich) is the same: embezzlement, or misappropriation of donations. The witnesses, their statements and both parties’ arguments will likely overlap greatly, in both proceedings.
In addition, the Higher Court has assigned the same panel of judges to the sequel, which means that the three professional and two lay judges of the Göttingen court will have to decide on charges they previously dismissed. The allocation of the same judges is based on their alleged expertise and because the Higher Court found the Chamber to be unbiased. The latter disregards the many accusations of bias by the defence teams and the charges Fuellich recently pressed against Chair Schindler (and Public Prosecutor John).
The Attempted Destruction of a Voice, a Lawyer, an Aspiring Politician and a Man
Given the previous dismissals of the charges and the highly political nature of the current trial, the new charges seem like a desperate attempt by German authorities to keep Fuellmich, under lock and key, while ruining him on all levels.
White, or psychological, torture inflicted on Fuellmich consists of him having been lured and kidnapped from Mexico, having been imprisoned on remand since 13 October 2023 and in isolation since 10 June 2024. During transport to the courthouse, his hands and feet are shackled and chained together and he is accompanied by heavily armed guards in bullet-proof vests. Before each transports he is warned that not wearing such a vest himself, might mean he might get hit by a stray bullet – a treatment that even the guards say they have never experienced before, for a non-violent detainee.
Meanwhile, Fuellmich, who ran a successful law practice and represented clients in the famous Volkswagen (diesel scandal) and Deutsche Bank (fraud) processes, has been declared bankrupt in Germany and risks losing his licence to practise as a lawyer, both in Germany and California, should he be given a long prison sentence. The prosecution has demanded a prison sentence of three years and nine months in the ongoing trial alone. The verdict of the upcoming trial will be combined with the verdict concluding the current, as Schindler indicated.
Arguments of the Higher Regional Court
In the 14-page judgment, Braunschweig states that the sixteen charges will likely result in a conviction. The comment reads like a (not so) covert instruction to the court and the range of arguments listed in support of the verdict, seem to whisper: “There has got to be something here you van work with!”
Disputing two main points put forward by the current defence team, the Higher Regional Court firstly argues that Fuellmich cannot rely on the ‘Business Judgement Rule’. This rule protects organisations from frivolous lawsuits, as long as it can be assumed that the leadership had the best interests of the organisation and its stakeholders at heart. It also takes into account that managers sometimes make non-optimal decisions.
The second point – the defence’s argument that CA was never officially registered as a foundation and, therefore, was subject to different management requirements – Braunschweig contests by stating that the organisation nevertheless functioned (identified?) as a foundation and that Fuellmich, as one of its directors, would have had a duty to conduct proper (cash) management.
Stating CA to be on par with a registered foundation, the Higher Court then argues that Fuellmich should have arranged a legal claim for reimbursement of expenses, and drawn up contracts specifying the activities that Fuellmich’s law firm performed for CA.
The fact that the 16 payments were made by the accountant and co-signed by Viviane Fischer, does not satisfy the Higher Regional Court (unlike the court in Göttingen and the previous two prosecutors). Braunschweig claims that the payments were made to cover the costs of Fuellmich’s law firm, while not meeting the requirements for lawyers’ invoices.
Value for money
The payments would not constitute a problem, the Higher Regional Court goes on to write, if the assets’ total had increased proportionally to the amount paid out to Fuellmich. This ignores the significant increase in value of the 1 million Euros, that Reiner Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer invested in gold, in 2020 (again with the aim of keeping their assets out of the government’s hands). Depending on the exact time of the purchase, the increase of the gold price could, largely, cover the total of the sixteen payments.
The Higher Court furthermore states – again contrary to the conclusions of the two Prosecutors – that the work performed by Fuellmich’s law firm (answering emails, telephone traffic and organisational tasks) was inconsistent with the objectives that CA had set for itself: promoting and conducting research, holding lecture series and seminars, and promoting art projects.
The Question of Communication
Neither were the payments necessary to spare Fuellmich financial loss, the Higher Court argues, for CA’s founders could have chosen not to carry out these organisational and communicative activities. This is a remarkable stance, as it implies that establishing a good relationship with customers is apparently irrelevant for optimal foundation management.
Not choosing to communicate with co-founders Antonia Fischer and Dr Justus Hoffman about the payments, however, was wrong, writes Braunschweig (which the Göttingen court also noted), adding that the two should be entitled to 1/4 of the amount paid to Fuellmich’s law firm, each.
Here, the Higher Regional Court seems to contradict itself, as Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffman contributed nothing organisationally to the success – and therefore not to the objectives – of CA. This was precisely the reason why Viviane Fischer and Reiner Fuellmich split from the other two in 2021 and relaunched the platform as Corona Investigative Committee.
Braunschweig, anticipating this argument, goes on to state that Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffman, as was also claimed during the current trial, were not able not contribute to the success of CA, because they had to earn a living with their law practice. Testimonies have revealed, however, that the CA-accountant offered the two lawyers to pay for expenses and more, repeatedly, but that no declarations were submitted.
The court further referred to Justus Hoffman’s dissatisfaction with the 16 payments. His unhappiness was noted in the minutes of a meeting held on 5 October 2022. The meeting, however, took place after 2 September 2022, the day that Viviane Fischer ejected Reiner Fuellmich from CA (unannounced and publicly, accusing him of malpractice), and Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer handed over their 18 charges to Prosecutor John.
As said, the various arguments underpinning Braunschweig’s verdict provide the court in Göttingen with enough handles to make new criminal trial, too, last for months, while keeping the accused behind bars, whether in isolation or not.
No date has yet been set for the sequel trial, as the current proceedings have yet to conclude.