Helnwein in Court 6/7
From
http://members.tripod.com/German_Scn_News/has07.htm
Helnwein in Court - 1991 to 1997 - continued
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 345
Sworn Affirmation
In recognition of the meaning of a sworn
affirmation and the penalties of submitting a
false, even a negligently false, affirmation, I
hereby affirm and present to the court under
oath:
Personal Information:
Gottfried Helnwein, painter, at the castle 2, D -
56659 Burgbrohl, born 8 Oct 48 in Vienna
At no point in time have I described myself as a
"clergyman," nor have I ever been a so-called
"clergyman."
Neither do I have the slightest wish to be a
"clergyman."
Since I left school 25 years ago, I have been an
independent artist and have devoted myself
entirely to this profession since that time.
The assertion that I was a so-called "Class IV"
Auditor (whatever that may be) is pure
conjecture and does not reflect any fact.
I am not nor have ever been a "Class IV
Auditor."
The assertion that I was a so-called "Class 4
Auditor" who was shown some time ago in
some publication by the Scientology Church is
false and is absolutely sheer conjecture.
Burgbrohl, the 14th of March 1994
/signature/
Gottfried Helnwein
Scan of original German
Helnwein: "... I am not nor have I ever been a Class 4
Auditor" - 14 March 1994
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 346
Written Transcript
[seal]
16 U 163 / 95
"Graefe"
FRANKFURT AM MAIN
In the legal dispute
1. of the Association for the Interests of
Tyrannized Fellow Humans, Inc., represented
by its board, which is represented by its primary
chairman, Mrs. Jeanete Schweitzer, 125
Ensheimer Street, 66386 St. Ingbert,
2. of the Association of Peace Education in
Saarland, Inc., represented by its board, which
is represented by its primary chairman, Mrs.
Christa Janal, 14 Bismarck Street, 66111
Saarbruecken
Accused and Appellants,
- Process executor: Attorney Christoph Heyne,
Frankfurt am Main -
vs.
the painter Gottfried Helnwein, Burg Brohl 2,
56659 Burgbrohl,
Complainant and Appeal defendant,
- Process executor: Attorney Dr. Foersterling,
Frankfurt am Main -
Scan of original German
Frankfurt am Main Superior State Court: "... Helnwein
is a Scientologist and a Class 4 Auditor ..." - 20 June
1996
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 347
16 U 163/95 - 2 -
in the 16th Civil Senate of the Frankfurt am
Main Superior State Court presided over by
Superior State Court Judge Baumecker, with
Superior State Court Judges Dr. Deppert and
Janzen in the oral hearing of 9 May 1996, has
recognized as just:
On appeal by the accused the
decision of the 3rd Civil Chamber
of the Frankfurt am Main State
Court of 25 May 1995 is
overturned.
The accused were ordered to
cease from distributing or
expressing verbally or perceptually
the following assertion:
"The profits from a limited edition
of lithographies available in 48
Saarbruecker Gallery
demonstrably flow to the
Scientology Secret Service (OSA
Munich)."
Moreover the charge is dismissed.
Further appeal of the accused is
denied.
The costs of the legal dispute will
be born 3/4 by the complainant
and 1/4 by the accused.
The decision is temporarily
executable for the complainant in
security in the amount of 5,000
DM and for the accused in security
in the amount of 15,000 DM.
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 348
16 U 163/95 - 3 -
In accordance with P. 543 Abs. 1 ZPO the
presentation of the facts of the case are omitted.
B a s i s of D e c i s i o n
The appeal of the accused is permitted.
Specifically, the legal means, form and time
limits were met and founded.
The appeal is also essentially founded.
The complainant is not entitled to have a desist
order issued in regard to most of the accused's
expressed assertions analogous with P. 1004
Abs. 1 BGB in connection with PP. 823, Abs. 2
BGB, 186 StGB
As far as the complainant demanding the
statements desist, he described himself as a
clergyman, whether it is a genuinely honest
assertion by the accused and whether this
assertion is true is all the same, the complainant
has himself to blame.
The accused may therefore leave the published
statements in the press.
With the Federal Constitutional Court (NJW
1992, 1439), the Senate is also of the opinion
that the requirements of the duty of presentation
would be overtaxed if someone who expressed
a derogatory assertion about a third party which
did not come from his own realm of experience
and exceeded his own capability of review
could not rely on uncontested press releases.
The Federal Constitutional Court indicates that
for the individual serving the public interest it is
regularly not possible
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 349
16 U 163/95 - 4 -
to contribute proof or facts of evidence based
on his own investigation. He is dependent upon
the media.
The accused referred to an interview which
appeared in 1993 in the "Celebrity" magazine
major issue 262. In it the complainant was
described as an "Auditor IV."
An auditor is a clergyman in the sense of the
terminology of the Scientology Church.
The accused may perceive this article as if the
complainant described himself as an "auditor"
and therefore as a clergyman. This description is
found in the title of the complainant's interview.
From that the impartial observer would have to
conclude that the complainant was interviewed
as a clergyman and had also given the reporter
the impression that he was a clergyman.
The accused may rely on this publication. It is,
indeed, the Scientology Church's own
publication and meant primarily for its members.
At the same time it is publicly available.
People who rely on such publicly available
sources can be ordered to desist or withdraw
their statements if the article has been withdrawn
or is recognizably outdated. (BVerfG, a.a.O.)
Neither provision is fulfilled. The complainant
did not present an outdated event, nor is one
visible to the Senate. Neither has the assertion
by "Celebrity" magazine been withdrawn. It
seems rather questionable that the complainant
turned to the Scientology Church Germany for
the desist order when the article itself was
neither written nor published by Scientology
Church Germany. The complainant
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 350
16 U 163/95 - 5 -
therefore could only have applied to the editorial
staff of "Celebrity" magazine in the USA to have
the assertion withdrawn. He indisputably did not
do that.
Even so, the Scientology Church Germany, as
has been revealed by the correspondence
presented by the complainant, still did not sign a
desist order nor did it have a retracting
statement printed.
Therefore the complainant has not contradicted
the publicly made assertion that he described
himself as a clergyman.
On this same ground, the accused are not
ordered to desist from stating that the
complainant is an "Auditor IV" of the
Scientology Church. That also applies to
statements they had published in the press.
The accused are not ordered to desist from
making the statement that the complainant
belongs to a group which uses coercive hypnotic
procedures with the help of a lie detector to
destroy people's psyches to control them. This
statement contains two elements. For one, it
contains the assertion that the complainant is a
member of a group, i.e., a member of the
Scientology Church. For another is it asserted
that this group uses coercive hypnotic
procedures to control the consciousness of
people.
The first part of the statement is an assertion of
fact. This assertion is true, because the
complainant is a Scientologist. In any case he
professes to this organization. This can be
concluded from numerous circumstances. For
instance it states in the "College" magazine from
1975 that the complainant at that time said he
had been a Scientologist since 1972. The
Scientology Church had also sent out invitations
to a summer festival with the complainant in
1986. It was stated in the magazine "Scientology
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 351
16 U 163/95 - 6 -
heute" as well as in "Spiegel" that the
complainant is a Scientologist. Also the
presented list of Scientology "Patrons" has the
complainant as a member of the organization.
Also the complainant told Mrs. Melissa Mueller,
a journalist, in 1991 that he was a Scientologist,
and she then published that in a magazine "Cash
Flow," without being contradicted by the
complainant.
Besides that the complainant contributed to an
advertisement in the "Frankfurter Allgemeinen"
newspaper about the death of L. Ron Hubbard,
the founder of the Scientology Church, and he
did not oppose the statement by the accused
that he was on a board of the Association of
Responsibility-Conscious Businesspeople, Inc.,
a cover organization for the Scientology Church.
The second part of the statement concerns itself
with the character of the Scientology Church.
Not only the Scientology Church is involved
with this statement, but also the complainant
himself, since a poor light is also shed on him by
the negative characterization of the Scientology
Church.
Nevertheless the accused may express this
assertion because they are relying for their
information on the appropriate release from the
standing conference of the Interior Ministers and
Senators of the States from 6 May 1994. In this
press release, the Scientology Organization was
described, among other things, as one which
conducted psycho-terrorism under the cloak of
a religious society.
In view of these findings of the State Interior
Ministers, there is no objection to the accused
asserting that this organization employs a
coercive hypnotic process and uses a lie
detector.
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 352
16 U 163/95 - 7 -
The Scientology Church did not contradict this
publication by the State Interior Ministers. No
retraction of its statements were demanded or
published. Therefore the accused may assume
correctness of the statement in this press
release.
It plays no role that the publication of the press
release happened only after the accused
authored the open letter of March 3, 1994. In
that regard the press release may only repeat
that which has been long communicated by the
agency responsible for defending against the
danger, and also that which could be obtained
from publicly accessible sources.
But even if that would not have been the case,
the decision of the legal dispute at hand depends
on the factual and legal situation at the point in
time of the last oral hearing. Therefore, whether
the accused at the time of the distribution of the
open letter of March 3, 1994 could trust the
rightness of what it said, can remain undecided,
because they had learned the facts from other
published communications. As to the question of
whether the accused must be stopped from
making their statements, or if they can trust
press releases for what they say, that depends
only on the situation at the time of the last oral
hearing.
At that point in time, the uncontested press
release from the State Interior Ministers
Conference of May 6, 1994 was available.
The basic rights of the complainant have not
been violated by the distribution of the
statements under discussion. The complaint is
able to use his general personality rights and his
basic right to free exercise of religion in
opposition to the basic rights of the accused to
freedom of opinion.
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 353
16 U 163/95 - 8 -
Nevertheless, in the case at hand, the interests
of the accused prevail in their publication of the
assertion that the complainant, as a clergyman, a
Class IV Auditor and a Scientologist, belongs to
an organization which employs psychological
terrorism.
The complainant is an internationally known
artist who has fallen into the public eye with his
artistic works and actions. He has also stated
that he was ready to cooperate with the artistic
arrangements at the "Neue Bremm," a former
Nazi era concentration camp in Saarbuecken.
The question of whether the complainant will get
this contract is of interest to the public. In
connection with this, it is also of interest to the
public of whether the complainant is a member
of the Scientology Church and whether he has
gotten so far as to obtain Class IV Auditor and
what kind of an organization the Scientology
Church is.
It should also be taken into consideration that
the complainant, in numerous publications, has
described himself as a Scientologist and a Class
IV Auditor, and has been described as such by
the press. Therefore the complainant has not
exactly kept his membership and his concepts of
Scientology a secret in the past.
But the complainant wants to stop the statement
that there is evidence that the profits from a
limited edition lithograph which is available in the
Saarbruck Gallery will go to the Scientology
secret service (OSA Munich). This statement is
dealing with an assertion of fact. Indisputably,
no money has yet gone to OSA. As can be seen
from a letter from the chairman of the
Scientology Church on May 7, 1992, the
complainant stated that he was prepared to put
one of his works of art on the market for the
purpose of supporting Narconon and the OSA.
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 354
16 U 163/95 - 9 -
The complainant only commented that the
money was supposed to have been meant for
Narconon. But when he learned that the money
was being planned for other uses, he withdrew
his statement. This was not explicitly contested
by the accused. With their undisputed statement
they only meant that the correctness of the
assertion would be proven if the profits were to
go to Narconon. It could not be excluded from
the accused's statement that the complainant had
only promised to have the profits go to the
Narconon company. The words "demonstrably
flow" define a description of a present event,
and are not a statement of the complainant's
intent.
Since this assertion is false, and the accused
themselves do not maintain that money has
already flowed, there is a claim to have them
desist analogous to PP. 823 Abs. 2, 186 StGB,
1004 Abs. 1 BGB.
The decision of costs is based on P. 92 Abs. 1
ZPO. In doing that the Senate has considered
that each of the four assertions from the
complainant are of equal value.
The current execution of this decision is based
on P. 709 ZPO
16 U 163/95 - 10 -
The Senate saw no reason to permit appeal,
because legal questions of fundamental
significance have not been an issue
Baumecker Dr. Deppert Janzen
Scan of original German
Helnwein & Scientology, Lies & Treason by Peter Reichelt, 1997 - Page 355
Scientology member magazine "IMPACT" 19, 1988
Helnwein appeared for the first time on the "Patron" list
----------------------------------------------------
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
German_Scn_News <german_scn_news@hotmail.com>
5 Feb 2000
This url has LOTS of graphics which are scans of the original documentation
2/3 O 507/94
LG Frankfurt am Main
Recorded according to minutes on 20 June
1996
employed by the Justice Department
as documenting official
of the business office
SUPERIOR STATE
COURT
IN THE NAME OF THE
PEOPLE
JUDGMENT
German Scientology News
Unofficial translations from German-speaking countries
Index/link to over 800 articles -
http://cisar.org/trnmenu.htm
Informational publications -
http://members.tripod.com/German_Scn_News
For non-commercial use only Have a nice day
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.