Director of the District Court under observation of the Allies, the UN, the Human Rights Council, the embassies, the American criminal and military police, the Russian defence attaché, etc.
⇒ Further evidence on the present manhunt for innocent people will be submitted to the public prosecutor
The World/Pforzheim/Keltern/Weiler. On 01. October 2020, ARCHEVIVA publishes the cover letter of the „perpetrator“ Heiderose Manthey, orally convicted in the criminal trial at the Pforzheim district court by judge at the district court (on probation) Martina Resch, orally convicted „perpetrator“ Heiderose Manthey publishes the cover letter to the Allies, Presidents, Ambassadors of the countries represented in Germany, UN, UN Special Rapporteur Nils Melzer, Chairperson of the Human Rights Council Elisabeth Tichy-Fisslberger and others.
Due to repeated „technical“ difficulties and malfunctions, the mail was resent today with the letter to Oliver Weik, Director of the Pforzheim District Court, and to Public Prosecutor Sven Müller of the Karlsruhe Public Prosecutor’s Office – Pforzheim branch.
A political-legal game with touching, so that others have to suffer ? Oliver Weik is SPD-municipal councillor in Keltern !
ARCHE now publishes the contents of the appeal to Oliver Weik, who is, by the way, SPD-municipal councillor of the municipality of Keltern, i.e. municipal council in the municipality whose mayor Heiderose Manthey has denounced for insulting in three cases.
Mayor Bochinger is represented by Henning von Restorff of the previously renowned law firm Ladenburger.
Previous publications on the publicised terrible exclusions of respectable people from the community of Keltern: Read worldwide: The director of the district court of Pforzheim, Oliver Weik, receives the ultimate demand from Heiderose Manthey [Weltweit gelesen: Der Direktor des Amtsgerichtes Pforzheim, Oliver Weik, erhält die ultimative Forderung von Heiderose Manthey] and Steffen Jörg Bochinger, mayor of a municipality – Head of the ARCHE and a young man fight for her reputation – First evidence submitted to the public prosecutor’s office: Discrimination passage in the mission statement of the municipality Keltern outlaws the young man ! [Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Bürgermeister einer Gemeinde – Leiterin der ARCHE und ein junger Mann kämpfen um ihre Reputation – Erste Beweise bei der Staatsanwaltschaft eingereicht: Diskriminierungspassus im Leitbild der Gemeinde Keltern ächtet den jungen Mann !]
Here is the statement of claim to Oliver Weik Immediate annulment of the judgment of 24 September 2020 in 3 Cs 810 JS 3858/20 [Sofortige Annullierung des Urteils vom 24. 09. 2020 aus 3 Cs 810 JS 3858/20]
Immediate annulment of the judgment of 24.09.2020 in 3 Cs 810 JS 3858/20
Founder and director of the civic engagement ARCHE based in Keltern-Weiler (founded 2006)
with the aim
Weiler, the 28.09.2020
Dear Mr Oliver Weik,
Director of the Local Court of Pforzheim,
on Thursday, 24 September 2020 at 09:30 a.m., a criminal trial against Heiderose Manthey took place at Pforzheim district court.
The relevant file number is 3 Cs 810 JS 3858.
The presiding judge in the criminal proceedings was Martina Resch, a judge at Pforzheim Local Court (on probation).
The public prosecutor of the Karlsruhe branch of the Pforzheim public prosecutor’s office involved in the proceedings was Sven Müller.
The complainant was Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor of the municipality of Keltern, represented by Henning von Restorff from the Ladenburger law firm in Pforzheim.
On the instructions of the public prosecutor’s office in Karlsruhe – Pforzheim branch, the investigation was carried out by Sabine Schuster, head of the Remchingen police station, and then by Ute Schoch-Wuerz from the Calw criminal investigation department.
Criminal charges and an application for the initiation of criminal proceedings were filed by clerk and public prosecutor Christina (according to the Internet) Bossert of the Karlsruhe public prosecutor’s office – Pforzheim branch.
The underlying deed in the community of Keltern
Heiderose Manthey had to become active as 1st Chairperson of the ARCHE e.V. Waldbronn and as 1st Chairperson of the ARCHE e.V. i.Gr. Weiler, after a young man seeking help had been admitted to the ARCHE.
This young man had been severely discredited, reviled and excluded as a participant during the non-public sessions of the mission statement of the community of Keltern.
Finally, he was also excluded in public by announcement on the website of the municipality of Keltern.
The young man gave a presentation in project group 4 of the mission statement of the municipality of Keltern on „Natural planting methods and a natural life and settlement model“.
At first he received an ovation, but shortly afterwards he was excluded from the mission statement of the municipality.
The „ideology“ behind the concept was frowned upon.
The statement of opposition of 20 September 2020 states on page 16
„During the model process, the young man manages to give a lecture on natural planting methods and on a natural life and settlement model. For this he receives applause from the model participants from his group. This makes the young man very happy.
After it became known that he works in the style of a natural ecologist working in Russia named Anastasia, he was abruptly reviled and the entire organisation of the ARCHE was suddenly declared to be an association representing „anti-democratic and right-wing nationalist ideas“.
The young man’s written complaint about his ostracism and about the threatened exclusion was not heard by the person responsible for the mission statement, Mr. Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor.
On the contrary: Mayor Bochinger was sorry that the outlaw felt he was being disregarded.
However, Mayor Bochinger did not take any action against the discrimination he himself had brought about and published. What a mockery !
So the discreditation was continued.
The young man then turned to the head of the main office, Steffen Riegsinger of the municipality of Keltern, with the request that the violations of his rights in his case be worked out and that his rights be rectified.
He received no reply to his letter, which was posted in the town hall of Keltern-Ellmendingen under the eyes of a witness.
The article relating to that incident reads:
Corruption in Ellmendingen town hall ?
What does Head of the Department Steffen Riegsinger not tell the population?
Is Mayor Steffen Bochinger playing a false game?
The young man’s minutes of the proceedings in the mission statement were published in blacked-out form.
In anonymised form ARCHEVIVA publishes the letter from „Bernd Schöpfle“ (name changed) to Steffen Riegsinger, the minutes of body image participant A, the minutes of body image participant B and the letter from the ARCHE as confirmation that the discrimination was sent to the United Nations – another example from the community of Keltern for public denunciation with the knowledge of those responsible, but without their intervention.
The related article reads:
Charge against mayor Bochinger von Keltern ?
A new form of „Jew“ persecution
A poisonous sting from the mission statement process: Church leader presumes to separate himself from unwelcome people
Several participants distanced themselves in writing from the model-passus, which despises and excludes people.
However, even these were named on the municipality’s website as the (co-)authors of the mission statement resolution after having given their written dissociation to the mayor of Keltern, which they had expressly opposed.
Consequently, they were also listed as the co-authors of the passage „Klare Kante …“, i.e. as (co-)authors of the open hunt for any human being.
Heiderose Manthey now publicly asked the mayor and the local councils of the community of Keltern the following questions:
Questions to the mayor of Bochingen and the municipal council of Keltern on the implementation of the passage „Klare Kante
1. Who in the community of Keltern decides who are citizens of the Reich, neo-Nazis or members of the Anastasia movement?
2. what are the consequences for these citizens after they have been sentenced?
3. Who are the other citizens named under point, point, point … who are shown the „clear edge“?
4. what does the identification of these citizens look like? Haven’t we already done that?
5. How is the clear edge implemented in practice?
6. who are the supervisors of the municipality by name ?
7. where can one train and apply to become a „Reichsbürger-Schauer“ and „Anastasia-Schauer“ ?
Proof: The publication of the specialist magazine www.ARCHEVIVA.com was saved by the Calw criminal investigation department and is enclosed as a CD with the criminal file on page 49 „Insult BS: H. B. Manthey ASi49 St/0810638/2020“.
On 2nd January 2020, ARCHE employees began to file the correspondence between the parties involved with a warning regarding the mission statement pass, as well as posting documents, label franking, return receipts, minutes, memorial protocols, etc. in a folder as documents for the intended criminal complaint against the mayor of the municipality of Keltern, against the municipal councils and against the employees in the administration of the municipality of Keltern due to various offences.
This criminal complaint has not yet been filed because the first chairwoman of the ARCHE e.V. Waldbronn and the ARCHE e.V. i.Gr. Weiler, Heiderose Manthey, was active in writing two enforcement proceedings, a complaint to the Federal Court of Justice and the drafting of a constitutional complaint, which currently amounts to 4692 pages.
In the meantime, Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor of Keltern, instructed Henning von Restorff, a lawyer in the Ladenburger law firm, to bring a criminal charge against Heiderose Manthey for insulting her in three cases.
In it, reference was made to three publications in which the educational journalist compared the events in wine presses with events under National Socialism. Censorship of the press, on the one hand suppressing freedom of opinion and on the other hand defaming, ostracising and excluding unpopular people at will – these are well-known methods from the National Socialist era. Art was also censored during this period.
The exclusion of the young man from the community is not about the physical killing of allegedly religiously or ideologically maladjusted people, but about a mental – psychological abuse, which is classified by UN-SPECIAL REPORTING TORTURER for Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CIDTP), Prof. Nils Melzer, in no way less in its effects than physical torture.
Psychological torture happens in small parts and is murderous when combined
Melzer: „The essence of torture is basically to break the mind of a person.“
This is what happened here in Keltern: a young man was publicly discredited, pilloried and released for hunting because of his opinions on planting and settlement methods.
Since neither the young man’s nor the head of the ARCHE’s mission statement had been given the right to be heard within the mission statement by the mission statement participants, the group leaders and those responsible for the mission statement, and since no remedy had been found, it was necessary to comply with the natural rights, Magna Charta, Basic Law, etc. Heiderose Manthey had to resort to further measures in order to make the present disregard for human beings public.
Heiderose Manthey would have been guilty if she had not reported this case or made it public !
Heiderose Manthey therefore had to act in the exercise of legitimate interests:
Legally regulated in §193 StGB, it concerns the offence of insult (§185 StGB) and defamation §186 StGB) and regulates that a punishable insult does not exist if the perpetrator has acted in the exercise of legitimate interests. According to the prevailing view, the justification of the pursuit of legitimate interests applies to all offences including physical insult; however, it is not applicable to other offences against individual rights and in particular is not the expression of a general weighing clause.
Go to the publications
The processes of exclusion of (unwanted and unwelcome) people from the Keltern community, recorded in the mission statement under the passage „Clear edge …“.
Serious degradations in the mission statement of the Keltern community
This is ONLY a matter of arbitrary interpretation of people who you want to throw out of the community !
It is about HATE and about CHEVY !
It is about the LUST OF HUNTING people!
Here, the future course of action of the Keltern community is clearly a criminal exclusion of (blameless, adapted and decent) people.
The Basic Law is not only seriously violated here in § 1.
The presiding judge at Pforzheim District Court, Martina Resch, definitely did not recognise in the criminal proceedings against Heiderose Manthey that Heiderose Manthey
1. in her function as representative of the entire ARCHE, also as 1st Chairperson of the ARCHE e.V. Waldbronn and the ARCHE e.V. i.Gr. Weiler et al.
2. in her function as her defender
3. in her function as an investigative journalist to uncover human rights crimes such as the present
4. in its functions mentioned on pages 1 and 2 of this letter, to expose abuses in the municipality of Keltern by making people aware of the present, multiple criminal acts, including by means of artistic actions
was on trial.
The rights of Heiderose Manthey in the defence have been infringed by
1. Non-compliance with § 3 of the Basic Law: Before the court all are equal by not handing over the file to the lawyer of the person filing the complaint
2. Incorrect statement by Karaasenov, a clerk of the judiciary, that no other submissions – „in his opinion“ (he later added) – had been included in the file other than those of the defence itself
3. discrediting of the accused, such as „The defence should submit the request to drink water in writing“, otherwise the defence would have nothing to say, except when asked to do so
Heiderose Manthey stated on several occasions that she had been tortured and had been tortured.
The judge „instructed“ the defence in a bossy tone about the course of the trial and informed her that the defence would still have time to get rid of everything that was „burning on her mind“.
But the time that Judge Resch had given her was only the pleading and even in this case the judge interrupted the defence several times !
4. The judge did NOT inform Heiderose Manthey that she would not allow the defence this time until the plea.
5. The judge rejected all the written submissions made by the defence during the hearing.
6. Judge Resch did not respond to any other requests made previously – with the exception of the request for counsel – either before or during the hearing.
These requests were not answered and were not implemented.
The requested assistance of Heiderose Manthey was rejected in writing before the trial.
The defence had to sit behind a built up „baffle/spitting screen“ and had to admonish several times louder speaking both on the part of the judge and on the part of the prosecutor, who spoke very softly, especially in his pleading.
The judge said that the defence was already sticking out behind the baffle/spit shield with one ear to be able to hear better.
No doubt the defence leaned with the left ear past the baffle/spitting screen to be able to understand better. However, the judge’s words were swallowed and muffled by the baffle and so the defence could only moderately understand the judge’s content.
Only 4 spectators and 4 reporters were admitted.
Many people stood in front of the door and could not watch the trial.
The demand for the trial to be broadcast outside was loud.
7. Judge Resch completely rejected important evidence during the trial, i.e. all evidence which the defence wanted to submit additionally, also the statutes of the ARCHE e.V. Waldbronn and the statutes of the ARCHE e.V. i.Gr. Weiler for the review of the statutes in the points „Help for young people“ which says among others:
All requests were made in writing by the defence, with time limits, handed over to the court, read out loud and commented on.
Evidence No. 05c Part 3, I with 136 pages, II with 114 pages and III with 233 pages was not admitted to the hearing.
No. 05c Part 1 with 142 pages and Part 2 with 77 pages had been submitted to the Pforzheim Local Court before the trial.
It can be found at www.ARCHEVIVA.com:
The incidents during the process of defining the mission statement of the Keltern community are documented with the exclusion phrase „clear edge“.
In three documentations, Part I with 136 pages, Part II with 114 pages and Part III with 233 pages, the evidence of Documentation No. 05c alone was presented, consisting of Part 1 with 142 pages and Part 2 with 77 pages. The events in Keltern, in the town hall and in the community, the circles went as far as Pforzheim to the courts, public prosecutor’s offices, Solidarity Region, etc. were listed in the following documentations:
No. 05a „Bochinger Steffen Jörg – penalty order against Heiderose Manthey – appeal Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor of the municipality of Keltern, KHK Schoch-Wuerz, Criminal Police Directorate Calw, PHK S. Schuster, Pforzheim Police Headquarters, Remchingen Police Station -“ with 36 pages
Acknowledgement of receipt by the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe on 06 August 2020 at 23:55
No. 05b „Bochinger Steffen Jörg – penalty order against Heiderose Manthey – appeal Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor of the municipality of Keltern, KHK Schoch-Wuerz, Kriminalpolizeidirektion Calw, PHK S. Schuster, Polizeipräsidium Pforzheim, Polizeiposten Remchingen -“ with 324 pages
Acknowledgement of receipt by the Federal Constitutional Court of Karlsruhe on 22 August 2020 at 18:28
No. 05c „Bochinger Steffen Jörg – penalty order against Heiderose Manthey – appeal Steffen Jörg Bochinger, Mayor of the municipality of Keltern, KHK Schoch-Wuerz, Kriminalpolizeidirektion Calw, PHK S. Schuster, Polizeipräsidium Pforzheim, Polizeiposten Remchingen -“ a total of 702 pages submitted.
Acknowledgement of receipt by the Federal Constitutional Court Karlsruhe on 21 and 23 September 2020 at 18:19
Federal Constitutional Court Karlsruhe and Local Court Pforzheim
Documentation No. 05c of the complaint to the Federal Constitutional Court deals with the events surrounding Mayor Bochinger and his local council
District court director Oliver Weik also involved in the inhuman exclusion passage of the mission statement as the SPD community council of winepresses through the signature of his faction leader ?
Federal Constitutional Court Karlsruhe and Local Court Pforzheim
Documentation no. 05c of the complaint to the Federal Constitutional Court deals with the events surrounding Mayor Bochinger and his local council
District court director Oliver Weik also involved in the inhuman exclusion passus of the mission statement as SPD community councillor of winepresses by the signature of his parliamentary party leader ?
Especially in the decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the applications, the judge worked very benevolently and friendly with the public prosecutor Sven Müller from the public prosecutor’s office in Karlsruhe – branch Pforzheim.
The defence, on the other hand, was repeatedly approached in a sharp tone by Judge Resch, interrupted and not just tried to stall.
With a comparison of the methods used during the National Socialist era, Heiderose Manthey succeeded in her defence, especially in her plea, in uncovering the events in the community of Keltern to some extent.
The correspondence which took place between her, the mayor of the community of Keltern, the group leaders and others will be submitted to the public prosecutor’s office in Karlsruhe – Pforzheim branch for the purpose of filing criminal charges.
The charges against Mayor Bochinger, against parts of the administration of the community of Keltern and against the local council of the community of Keltern will follow.
At the beginning of the trial, the judge did not ask Heiderose Manthey in the defence whether she was familiar with the files. Nor was the prosecutor asked whether he was aware of the file in its entirety.
It is stated that each party must be asked, for example, „Ms Manthey, do you know the contents of the file? The answer must be recorded.
So the judge must also ask the prosecutor. This procedure dates back to 1257 and is still valid today.
Heiderose Manthey did not even have the opportunity to ask about the file and the applications that have not yet been answered, that is how stringently Judge Martina Resch proceeded against the defence and wiped her mouth.
Judge Resch should not have opened the hearing without an answer to this question.
That is a procedural error.
Heiderose Manthey was previously prevented from accessing the full file. Pages which she had written herself were not copied, so that she did not have in her hands a file numbered consecutively.
The opposing counsel, on the other hand, was handed the file even though he and his client were not present in the courtroom.
The file was fetched and returned by the lawyer’s office of the Mayor of Berlin, Steffen Jörg Bochinger, who had filed a complaint against the prosecution, according to judicial clerk Karaasenov.
Heiderose Manthey is subsequently demanding the written rejection of her petitions, so that the reopening of the case at any time before the administrative court can be addressed.
Heiderose Manthey hereby requests immediate written notification of the cancellation, so that the defence can initiate a retrial at any time.
Judge Resch was neither prepared to weigh up the legal interests of the parties nor to be heard at all.
Heiderose Manthey demands the immediate annulment of this judgement on the part of the management of the Pforzheim District Court due to serious procedural errors, even before the minutes have been viewed or an appeal has been lodged.
With kind regards
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)