The Prosecutor's office had accused the 49-year-old politician, he had in municipal election campaign 2014 of contractors to bribe. Wolbergs rejected the accusations, his lawyer pleaded for acquittal, or termination of the Proceedings. In a first corruption process Wolbergs was convicted in July of 2019, because of two cases of acceptance of advantages, and all the other allegations, has been acquitted. From a penalty, the court saw.
In the process, it went to three construction projects on which contractors supported the candidate Wolbergs in the election campaign – and, in part, this is a donation to a political party to its former SPD to I want to save on procurement. So it looked at least the Prosecutor. With Wolbergs three entrepreneurs sat first in the dock. One of them was released on payment of a monetary condition from the process, sentenced to a second for bribery to a fine. The chamber was assumed that for the offence of bribery is sufficient that the interference is sought, it was also unsuccessful.
Numerous discovery margins
the second process was accompanied by highly emotional confrontations between the accused and defenders on the one hand and the prosecution on the other. This included numerous determining margins, as well as to the question of whether the second process may take place at all or not in terms of content with the first method, overcut, which would in the opinion of the defense to a process obstacle and referral prohibition.
Wolbergs' defender Peter Witting has argued, therefore, on the proceedings because of a procedural obstacle, and, in the event that the court does not follow the acquittal. Also this application should not be complied with, he pleaded to a termination of the proceeding for breach of a fair Procedure.FAZ.NET completely
access to all the exclusive F+articles. You will remain fully informed, for only € 2.95 per week.Now 30 days free of charge
The charge of the accused and the defence, the Prosecutor's office have unilaterally determined in the direction of guilt, the presiding judge, Georg Kimmerl not apply. To the criticism that two separate processes are said Kimmerl, the chamber would have thought it appropriate to lead only to a method but don't see any arbitrary splitting up of the proceedings by the public Prosecutor in order to charge Wolbergs. This circumstance had been at the time of sentencing taken into account.Updated Date: 17 June 2020, 09:21