You’re just a sick, fuckin’ joke of a lawyer without any integrity

“Law is a glittering lure. But there is the rare occasion when the client can be fooled on a level beyond flash, if he has a sentimental bond with the product, me, and my fee.”
With apologies to Mad Men.

Howdy crooked lawyer Sonja Hein-Schnieder,

You took on three cases. All concerning a young migrant. My Tibetan daughter. More than three years ago. From the very start you cared shit! Not only that. You colluded with the judge and the opposing party. Then you just fucked off into the sunset by having a fax (which is against the law) sent to the court by a third person (again against the law) on the day of a hearing. Your reason? No time. Gee, you are quite some friggin’ ridiculous lawyer chick to say the least.

Gets even better. You publicly proclaimed in an interview with the Munich Bar Association to have a sentimental relation with money and you do not feel properly remunerated. That’s deft. Then you have it pulled from their website, forgetting there’s the Wayback Machine and Docplayer. Embarrassing. That exactly seems to be your TM.

Ovid might offer some perspective: “Let your swift mind encompass what it is that you love, and withdraw your neck from the collar that hurts you. … You see few rivers flow from mighty fountains: by many inflowing waters they’re multiplied.

Perhaps you try to turn a little professional and the monetary flow will be multiplied. It might also be advisable you add a “safe harbour” statement to your public presence so that people have a chance to stay clear. Sturgeon’s Law, ya know.

I have copy/pasted the following, blatantly breaking all copyrights. Here we go:

“If the lawyer gives notice of termination – in the form of a declaration of intent which must be received – he/she has a post-contractual (subsequent) duty to provide information if the (former) client is threatened, for example, with direct damage related to the previous performance of the contract – for example, as a result of the expiry of a deadline. Various professional duties also have an after-effect – and remuneration must be secured.”

“Sofern es zu einer Kündigung seitens des Rechtsanwalts oder der Rechtsanwältin – in Form einer empfangsbedürftigen Willenserklärung – kommt, trifft diesen/diese eine nachvertragliche (nachwirkende) Pflicht zur Aufklärung, wenn der (ehemaligen) Mandantschaft bspw. ein unmittelbarer, mit der vorangegangenen Vertragserfüllung zusammenhängender Schaden – etwa infolge eines Fristablaufs – droht. Auch wirken diverse Berufspflichten nach – und es gilt, die Vergütung zu sichern.”

Here we are on the subject me thinks. I would appreciate you disclose what you have raked in. Raked in under breach of contract, mind you. One can hardly call it “earned” in an ethical sense. But hey, that’s you.

Section 627 BGB (German Civil Code) states:

“The right of termination is restricted for the lawyer only insofar as it may not be declared “untimely”, as stipulated by Section 627 (2) of the German Civil Code (BGB). Such a termination would be the case, for example, if the advisor resigns his or her mandate immediately before the filing of the application or the suspension of the statute of limitations for which he or she was called in, or shortly before a court date, and the client – possibly under the pressure of the application or statute of limitations deadline or the date – must now act independently because he or she can no longer find a new advisor in the short time available.”

“Das Recht zur Kündigung ist für den Rechtsanwalt oder die Rechtsanwältin lediglich insoweit eingeschränkt, als diese nicht „zur Unzeit“ erklärt werden darf, wie es § 627 Abs. 2 BGB vorschreibt. Eine solche Kündigung wäre beispielsweise der Fall, wenn der Berater unmittelbar vor der Antragstellung oder Verjährungshemmung, zu der er hinzugezogen wurde, oder kurz vor einem Gerichtstermin sein Mandat niederlegt und der Mandant bzw. die Mandantin – u. U. unter dem Druck der Antrags- oder Verjährungsfrist oder des Termins – nunmehr eigenständig handeln muss, weil er, bzw. sie in der Kürze der Zeit keinen neuen Berater mehr finden kann.”

Then there is the claim for remuneration, section 628 BGB (German Civil Code). Have you heard of it?

“Upon termination, the attorney’s remuneration for the services rendered up to that point shall be due in full pursuant to Section 8 (1) RVG. In addition, after the termination of the mandate, there is an obligation to settle and, if necessary, repay advances received.”

“Mit der Kündigung ist die Vergütung des Rechtsanwalts bzw. der Rechtsanwältin für die bis dahin erbrachten Leistungen nach § 8 Abs. 1 RVG insgesamt fällig. Zudem besteht nach der Kündigung des Mandats eine Verpflichtung, erhaltene Vorschüsse abzurechnen und ggfs. zurückzuzahlen.”

Un peu more detailed it reads something like this:

“If, after the commencement of the service, the employment relationship is terminated on the basis of Section 626 or Section 627 of the German Civil Code, the obligated party may, in accordance with Section 628 (1) sentence 1 of the German Civil Code, in principle demand a part of the remuneration corresponding to the services rendered to date. If he terminates the contract without being induced to do so by conduct in breach of contract on the part of the other party, or if he induces the termination of the contract by his conduct in breach of contract on the part of the other party, he shall not be entitled to remuneration to the extent that his previous services have become partially insignificant for the other party as a result of the termination. This does not pose any major problems in the case of consulting services on an hourly basis. In the case of remuneration according to RVG, this can lead to the complete omission of remuneration in court proceedings. This is illustrated by the BGH (ruling dated 29.9.2011 – IX ZR 170/10):

(1) If the lawyer terminates the client-lawyer relationship without being induced to do so by the other party’s conduct in breach of the contract, he shall not be entitled to remuneration insofar as the client has to appoint another attorney-at-law, whose remuneration would also cover the terminating lawyer’s work.

(2) A loss of interest shall also be assumed insofar as the attorneys who have been newly instructed on the basis of the termination can no longer perform timely procedural acts, can no longer submit timely declarations and can no longer participate in past appointments if these acts would also have been compensated with the statutory remuneration owed to them.”

You just vanished into thin, corrupt Bavarian air. However, you still proffer your questionable services on the Lawyer YouPorn site ‘my-sozialberatung‘ as of writing. A sort of honeytrap to lure unsuspecting potential clients.

Did you consider all this, or is professionalism anathema to you and you think you can just sneak away?

“Wird nach dem Beginn der Dienstleistung das Dienstverhältnis auf Grund des § 626 oder des § 627 BGB gekündigt, so kann der Verpflichtete nach § 628 Abs. 1 S. 1 BGB grundsätzlich einen den bisherigen Leistungen entsprechenden Teil der Vergütung verlangen. Kündigt er, ohne durch vertragswidriges Verhalten des anderen Teiles dazu veranlasst zu sein, oder veranlasst er durch sein vertragswidriges Verhalten die Kündigung des anderen Teiles, so steht ihm ein Anspruch auf die Vergütung insoweit nicht zu, als seine bisherigen Leistungen infolge der Kündigung für den anderen zum Teil bedeutungslos geworden sind. Dies stellt bei Beratungsleistungen auf Stundenbasis keine großen Probleme dar. Bei einer Vergütung nach RVG kann dies im gerichtlichen Verfahren dazu führen, dass eine Vergütung gänzlich wegfällt. Hierzu anschaulich der BGH (Urt. v. 29.9.2011 − IX ZR 170/10):

  1. Kündigt der Rechtsanwalt das Mandatsverhältnis, ohne durch vertragswidriges Verhalten des anderen Teils dazu veranlasst zu sein, steht ihm ein Anspruch auf Vergütung insoweit nicht zu, als der Mandant einen anderen Prozessbevollmächtigten neu bestellen muss, mit dessen Vergütung auch die Tätigkeit des kündigenden Anwalts abgegolten wäre.
  2. Von einem Interessenwegfall ist auch auszugehen, soweit die auf Grund der Kündigung neu beauftragten Rechtsanwälte fristgebundene Verfahrenshandlungen nicht mehr vornehmen, fristgebundene Erklärungen nicht mehr abgeben und an vergangenen Terminen nicht mehr teilnehmen können, wenn mit der ihnen geschuldeten gesetzlichen Vergütung auch diese Handlungen abgegolten gewesen wären.”

The following should be taken cum grano salis, especially since you as a lawyer do not want to compromise your excellent relationship with the Social Court and the Jobcenter to your own disadvantage (which should always be avoided. Keyword ‘Dinero, Buckeroos’). Be that as it may:

“In the event of termination of the contract by the professional, in order to avoid loss of rights on the part of the client, those actions must be taken which are reasonable and cannot be postponed; this refers in particular to the duty to inform and clarify. This includes, for example, the duty to inform the client of current deadlines or of corresponding risks that can only be avoided by immediate action.”

“Bei einer Kündigung des Auftrags durch den Berufsträger bzw. die Berufsträgerin sind zur Vermeidung von Rechtsverlusten des Auftraggebers/der Auftraggeberin in jedem Fall noch diejenigen Handlungen vorzunehmen, die zumutbar sind und keinen Aufschub dulden; gemeint sind damit insbesondere Hinweis- und Aufklärungspflichten. Hierzu gehört beispielsweise die Pflicht, dem Auftraggeber/der Auftraggeberin laufende Fristen mitzuteilen oder über entsprechende Risiken, die nur durch sofortiges Handeln vermieden werden können, aufzuklären.”

Perhaps the following professional law implications would be important for attorneys to consider. In case you fuckin’ care:

“Pursuant to Section 43a (5) BRAO in conjunction with Section 4 BORA, third-party funds are to be paid out at the latest immediately after the termination of the mandate or – insofar as possible and permissible – offset against outstanding fee claims.
The lawyer’s duty of confidentiality under Section 43a (2) BRAO in conjunction with Section 2 (1) BORA shall continue to apply after termination of the client relationship.
Pursuant to Section 11 (1) sentence 1 BORA, the client must be informed without delay and without separate request of all events and measures of importance for the progress of the case. The client must be informed of all important documents received or sent. This obligation shall continue to apply even after the lawyer’s mandate has been terminated, provided that the lawyer receives documents.
In this respect, it is advisable to inform the other party of this after resigning from the mandate. However, in legal proceedings, the power of attorney continues to exist until a new attorney is appointed, Section 87 (1) ZPO. Here, if necessary, service is to be effected and acknowledgement of receipt is to be made in accordance with § 14 BORA.
Pursuant to Section 50 (3) BRAO, the handing over of the case file, if requested, may in principle be refused until the lawyer is satisfied with regard to the fees and expenses owed by the client. This does not apply, however, if the withholding would be unreasonable under the circumstances, e.g. would lead to a considerable loss of rights.”

“Fremdgelder sind nach § 43a Abs. 5 BRAO i. V .m. § 4 BORA spätestens unverzüglich nach Mandatsniederlegung auszukehren bzw. – sofern möglich und zulässig – mit offenen Gebührenforderungen zu verrechnen.
Die anwaltliche Schweigepflicht aus § 43a Abs. 2 BRAO i. V. m. § 2 Abs. 1 BORA gilt auch nach Beendigung des Mandatsverhältnisses fort.
Nach § 11 Abs. 1 S. 1 BORA ist die Mandantschaft über alle für den Fortgang der Sache wesentlichen Vorgänge und Maßnahmen unverzüglich und ohne gesonderte Aufforderung zu unterrichten. Ihr sind alle wesentlichen erhaltenen oder versandten Schriftstücke zur Kenntnis zu geben. Diese Verpflichtung wirkt auch nach Mandatsniederlegung fort, sofern der Rechtsanwalt/die Rechtsanwältin Schriftstücke erhält.
Insoweit empfiehlt es sich, nach Mandatsniederlegung die Gegenseite davon zu unterrichten. Allerdings besteht im Anwaltsprozess die Vollmacht so lange fort, bis ein neuer Prozessbevollmächtigter bestellt ist, § 87 Abs. 1 ZPO. Hier sind ggfs. Zustellung zu bewirken und noch Empfangsbekenntnis nach § 14 BORA abzugeben.
Die etwaig gewünschte Herausgabe der Handakte kann nach § 50 Abs. 3 BRAO grundsätzlich so lange verweigert werden, bis der Rechtsanwalt bzw. die Rechtsanwältin wegen der von dem/der Auftraggebenden geschuldeten Gebühren und Auslagen befriedigt ist. Dies gilt allenfalls dann nicht, soweit das Vorenthalten nach den Umständen unangemessen wäre, also bspw. zu einem erheblichen Rechtsverlust führen würde.”

I hate to tell you, but you give the appearance of a fly-by-night lawyer. It should be mentioned for the sake of completeness, the Munich Social Kangaroo Court didn’t give a damn your breaking the law. Who knew?

Well, Jobcenter, Social Court and lawyer, the burning question again, how much money have you cleaned up? You, the lawyer who has achieved nothing, absofuckinglutely nothing over more three years.

A lawyer, socially engaged in ‘reboarding‘ (one wonders about the experience being reboarded by you) and enhanced with prominent Pinterest presence is kindly requested to make an effort.

IOW, me likes to see an answer by August 10, 2022.

An answer that does not insult my intelligence. Thanks a lotta.

I have a lovely pastime, madam. I love chewing gum and kickin’ fuckin’ ass. Trouble is, I’m outa gum.

If this all sounds like I detest you, it couldn’t be further from the truth. You’re just a sick, fuckin’ joke of a lawyer without any integrity. Besides, you’re blonde. You crooked lawyer simply helped/stood by in defrauding my daughter and her mother. In racist Germany. Oh btw, have you and Dan Hull (1) ever met by any chance?

Lastly, I’d like to mention the Nepali lawyer Sapana Malla who I know personally. She is an absolute professional of utmost integrity. You might want to know, Nepalis make a certain sound and gesture when they express disgust about someone. It is unmistakable and deeply embarrassing. Just saying.

If you’ll excuse me now. I’ll have to check why my pink 1973 Hyundai refuses to run. Breaks my heart. We have such a deep relationship.

À plus tard,

(draw in my signature here)
I am not an attorney, but Leonard J. Crabs is.

(1) US based corporate litigator Dan Hull in an email in 2016: “A lot of German lawyers are assholes”.


But wait! That’s not all!

Federal Ministry of Justice, a stalking judge in Germany? Surely you must be kidding


Federal Ministry of Justice
Fax: 030/ 18 580 – 95 25

cc Social Kangaroo Court Munich, criminal Jobcenter Munich, Public Prosec. Munich

March 19, 2022

Ref.: That racist, stalker & “judge” Ehegartner of the Social Kangaroo Court Munich

To whom it may concern,

When dealing with a lady, common courtesy and dignity suggest a comportment of a man commensurate that of a gentleman. A proper education, not steeped in blasé attitude and cockiness, would propound to act like a chevalier. In certain quarters of the exalted discipline of law this noble demeanour seems to be alien. Enter the bucolic province of Bavaria with Master Robert Shallow Ehegartner.

I would appreciate if you at the BMJ would get in touch with the esteemed President of the Munich Social Kangaroo Court Mrs. Mente. For the sake of completeness, madame is adorned with a PhD in law, iow, Diplom Rechtsanwalt. Di niente.

In which I take umbrage about the boorish conduct of Munich Social Court “judge” Robert Shallow, Esquire Ehegartner. I do not take it lightly when said person feels entitled to stalk my Tibetan daughter. When a woman explicitly and in writing tells a court that she wishes “no contact in any form from the social courts regarding the ongoing disputes”, then that should be pretty fuckin’ clear!  That is where everything stops. No contact. No bullshitting. Are we clear?!

In a letter of Feb. 24, 2022 and received by me on Feb. 26, 2022, this Falstaffian “judge” asks my daughter to comment on case S 42 AS 2594/16 by March 2, 2022. Turns out, this despicable provincial Law Lord of ill intent had already handed down his verdict (based on suppression of two documents to cover up fraud by the criminal labor office Jobcenter) on Feb. 10, 2022. This is how a real Kangaroo Court acts in racist Germany. This is how a sly deemster deals. This is how a rotten judge indulges in migrant voyeurism in racist Germany. Quelle surprise.

On March 13, 2022 I have filed a criminal complaint with the public prosecutor of Munich against the Punkah Wallah in the Zenana of the Jobcenter, “judge” Ehegartner for stalking my daughter. As can be expected in corrupt Germany, this will go nowhere.

Bullshit Ability may indeed be considered an honest signal of intelligence according to Martin Harry Turpin et al, Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, but it should be put to practice in appropriate situations, certainly not in a court of law.

Perhaps I am a tad too sensitive. It is just this bucolic rough charm of the sweaty Aborigines of this pre-Alpine province that is so alien to me and repugnant. They disgust me.

Words fail me to express my gratitude for your understanding and readiness to address these unpleasant incidences. I trust that I have made myself fuckin’ clear. Please refrain from sending me those disclaimers/jurisdiction/federal structure yaddayadda pointers and whatevs you dig up. If you, chances very slim with those politicians one would not wish to ever meet at a party or anywhere, should elect to reply, I would politely discourage. Politicians and associated persons affect my mood in a deflationary way. In plain French, I can not stand them.

Gnōthi Seauton,

The Honorable President of the Social Kangaroo Court Munich Edith Mente (Diplom Rechtsanwalt)

Dear black Americans, you claim to be racially discriminated. This is blatant nonsense.

Matter of fact, it “lacks any logic and factual context”.

Who says? A judge in Germany! Bear in mind, Germans are very meticulous and opinionated. They do not rush to conclusions, all is based on reasoning. Hegel, Kant, and the like.

Let’s first have a look at the Pdf ‘Denying Racism: Elite Discourse and Racism‘ – Teun A. van Dijk

The Forms and Functions of Racism Denials

The many forms denials of racism may take are part of a well-known overall discourse and interaction strategy, viz. that of positive self-presentation or keeping face (Brown and Levinson 1987; Goffman 1967; Tedeschi 1981). Given general social norms that prohibit explicit dis- crimination and outgroup derogation, white group members usually do not want to be seen as racists . When they want to say something negative about minorities, they will tend to use denials, disclaimers or other forms that are intended to avoid a negative impression with their listeners or their readers. That is denials have the function of blocking negative inferences of the recipients about the attitudes of the speaker or writer. Such denials may not only be personal, but especially in elite dis- course, they may also pertain to our group in general: We British (Dutch, French) are not racist … That is in talk about minorities, white people often speak as dominant group members.

Let’s fact-check. So without further ado, here is an excerpt from the court ruling of Munich judge Walter from Oct. 2021:

excerpt of Munich Local Court ruling, Ref.: 845 Ds 259 Js 153060/20

This translates to:

“The “Tibetan” daughter and the associated accusations of racism against Judge Ehegartner, are mere eyewash, since the defendant’s daughter is a German citizen. The statement made is therefore devoid of any logic and factual context, but rather brings the animosity of the defendant to the fore.”

Now by applying elite discourse we put that in context with black Americans and, bingo, no racism. Can’t be. Because …

“The black Americans and accompanying accusations of racism against the U.S. turn out to be mere window dressing, since black Americans are American citizens. The statement made thereafter lacks any logic and factual context, but rather brings the animosity of black Americans to the fore.”

As van Dijk’s paper concludes:

Racism, defined as a system of racial and ethnic inequality, can survive only when it is daily reproduced through multiple acts of exclusion, inferiorisation or marginalisation. Such acts need to be sustained by an ideological system and by a set of attitudes that legitimate difference and dominance. Discourse is the principal means for the construction and reproduction of this socio-cognitive framework. At the same time, there are norms and values of tolerance and democratic humanitarian- ism, which may be felt to be inconsistent with biased attitudes and negative text and talk about minorities. To manage such contradictions, white speakers engage in strategies of positive self-presentation in order to be able credibly to present the others in a negative light. Dis- claimers, mitigations, euphemisms, transfers, and many other forms of racism denial are the routine moves in social face-keeping, so that ingroup members are able to come to terms with their own prejudices. At the same time, these denials of racism have important social and political functions, e.g. in the management of ethnic affairs and the de-legitimation of resistance. We have seen that, especially in elite discourse, for instance in the media and in the legislature, the official versions of own-group tolerance, and the rejection of racism as an implied or explicit accusation, are crucial for the self-image of the elite as being tolerant, understanding leaders. However, we have also seen how these strategies of denial at the same time confirm their special role in the formulation and the reproduction of racism.

. . . . . .

Self-love for ever creeps out, like a snake, to sting anything which happens to stumble upon it.
Lord Byron

Fraud by judge of Social Court becomes socially acceptable in racist Germany

Even if public prosecutor Ken Heidenreich would turn his other blind eye on this case, there is nothing to see of any misconduct.

By Email

Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency (FADA) (1)
Glinkastraße 24
10117 Berlin

Sept. 15, 2021

cc BMJV, BMAS, SC, Bav. SC, Federal SC, County Court Munich, Public Prosecutor Munich, ECRI

Complaint about three judges of the Munich County Court and public prosecutor Heidenreich

To whom it may concern, perhaps interims Bernie,

I. On Sept. 6, 2021 I had to file a complaint with the County Court Munich after my complaint with the Local Court on Aug. 16, 2021 received, as was to be expected, an unsatisfactory decision of Aug. 26, 2021 (File # 845 Ds 259 Js 153060/20 – 28 Qs 23/21). On about two pages the judges Hillmeier, Schumann and Eser wasted valuable resources of thin sheet material made from plant fibers – which raises the subject of ecological sustainability, it should be noted in passing – by committing themselves to the subject of a ‘public defender’. This was never an issue in my complaint of Aug. 16, 2021. Unfortunately, the pressing subject of sticking to laws received exceedingly scant attention. Quelle surprise. Institutional racism has now three more names.

I had referred to

  • my right to be heard in preliminary proceedings pursuant to Section 163a (1) sentence 1 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).
  • Further, my Dec. 2020 criminal complaint against “judge” Ehegartner was ignored. It is however neatly placed in the court file Exhibit 46 and 48 enjoying a prolonged sleep.
  • I took the liberty yet again to point to the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court 2 BvR 1304/12 and here the marginal no. 14 and marginal no. 15 c, and
  • lastly, I could not help but feel the obligation to acquaint the august court with an introduction to the ‘Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights’ (updated on 30 April 2021) and here to section 174. There it reads:

“In any case, in systems where the prosecuting authorities are obliged by law to take into consideration both the facts for and against the suspect, a procedure whereby the prosecuting authorities themselves attempt to assess what may or may not be relevant to the case, without any further procedural safeguards for the rights of the defence, cannot comply with the requirements of Article 6 § 1 (Natunen v. Finland, §§ 47-49; Matanović v. Croatia, §§ 158, 181- 182).”

Alas, it proved fruitless and I was left with the impression of having talked to a brick wall. I do believe further elaborations would be redundant, as the general trend of this court of the province of Bavaria is self-explaining by now. A highly questionable “judge” of a Social Court who stops at nothing and who even after thirteen attempts of me to get rid of his sorry soul, insists on carrying on with his sordid deeds, has to be protected. By breaking laws, that is.

II. This impression was reinforced when public prosecutor Heidenreich applied his trademark rejection on Aug. 06, 2021 (# 120 Js 165253/21), which in exquisite Bavarian prose manifests itself to the discerned eye thus:

Pursuant to Section 152 (2) of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), preliminary proceedings for prosecutable criminal offenses may only be initiated if there are sufficient grounds for doing so. According to criminalistic experience, these must make it appear possible that a prosecutable criminal offense has been committed.
Mere suspicions do not justify charging someone with a crime.
There are no apparent indications of criminally relevant conduct.

For the sake of completeness, I should mention that the Munich prosecution has so far, and will always, refused to follow up on ALL criminal complaints I have filed. The Bavarian Nolle prosequi.

I have attached my criminal complaint against “judge” Ehegartner and the president of the Social Court. The fraud and the means by which this career-obsessed “judge” and individual of questionable and indecent intentions operates are stunning and the evidence damning. It should be added that in case 3 (Wahrnehmung des Umgangsrechts) this heinous “judge” does not even stop at defrauding the Nepali mother of my daughter. She had taken a loan of € 735.00 to cover the cost of a plane ticket to Nepal so that she could see her daughter after four years. “Judge” Ehegartner is a despicable person through and through and plies his trade with abandon in consensus with the Jobcenter Munich as is demonstrated in case 8 (Regelsatz), where blatant fraud flies into one’s face.

And, speaking of Munich prosecution, this just in today from the international press: “Would you be interested in some German gangsters?”

One comment (1) in DER SPIEGEL about the Federal Conduit for Hypocritical Conflict Management, aka the Federal Anti Discrimination Agency, reads:

“Anyone who, as a disadvantaged person, expects a concrete solution to his or her problem from this authority is naive anyway. I can also talk to a wall. The message is counted there and filed away. Once a year, there is a small report on how many letters/emails have been received. You don’t need a manager for that, the clerk does it.”

My complaint would be remiss if the question “COMMUNICATING JUDICIAL DECISIONS: A BLACK BOX OR TRANSPARENCY?”, posed by Team Czech Republic with Daniel Askari, Kristina Blažková and Kristina Rademacherová, would not be raised. Considering that “publicity is the very soul of justice”, as Jeremy Bentham rightfully stated, one should assume that “elements of transparency include: … presentation of judges (including photos and biographical information), …” and be made publicly available.

It is therefore surprising how hard it is to obtain pictures of German judges, unlike in the USA for example. Is tradition still reigning supreme, the brown rug so alluring, an interested soul may ask?

Anyway FADA, no response is not an option. At all!

Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.


(1) The comments to this article are pretty unanimous.

Criminal complaint attached ‘Exhibit1

Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, I am pretty conservative when the Nepali mother of a migrant is being defrauded by a judge of a social court

cc ECRI, BMJV, BMFSFJ, BMAS, SC, Bav. SC, Federal SC

Nancy Böhning could have relieved Bernhard from his suffering

Bernhard Franke,

you are the interim’s guy heading the FADA, aka the Anti Discrimination Agency of racist Germany. That’s quite a stretch. IOW, the FADA is a false flag organization, or if you prefer, a conduit for hypocritical conflict management. It is also, so it seems, an SPD organization with lucrative posts.

You received two complaints – so far – on July 26 and Aug. 3, 2021 with a complaint about the President of the Social Court Munich Edith Mente and racist “judge” Ehegartner respectively. So far no response. You know, Bernhard, I am pretty conservative when the Nepali mother of a migrant is being defrauded by a judge of a social court. But then I do not know the FADA’s standards.

It is a pity indeed when “Bar Camp” woman Nancy Böhning‘s (FFS, don’t read the comments) application got derailed by a contending bitch woman. It is also disconcerting when the Administrative Court Berlin had to get involved in the selection process of your successor and one can bet the farm on it that person will/has to be a, err, woman. So much about anti discrimination. This here reads like the whole thing FADA resembles a swamp; besides that, only female names appear. And that article is from April 2019!

Anyway. Bernhard, the pictures on the internet show you mostly in a suffering mood and I can relate to that. Well, in some you look drowsy. Being a male place holder has to sour one’s mood. Makes one placid.

Still, I would appreciate if you, or any other of your distinguished comrades-in-arms could assemble a response. It’s just the decent way to deal with something so sleazy. Glad you agree. Decades of sports have instilled in me a decent level of tenaciousness.

Thank you