Inside the Alaa M. Trial #74: The Wise Guy and The Suspicious

Higher Regional Court – Frankfurt, Germany

Trial Monitoring Summary #74

Hearing Date: May 14 & 16, 2024

CAUTION: Some testimony includes descriptions of torture.

Note that this summary is not a verbatim transcript of the trial; it is merely an unofficial summary of the proceedings.

Throughout this summary, [information located in brackets are notes from our trial monitor] and “information placed in quotes are statements made by the witness, judges or counsel.” The names and identifying information of witnesses have been redacted.

[Note:  SJAC continues to provide a summary of the proceedings while redacting certain details to protect witness privacy and to preserve the integrity of the trial.]

SJAC’s 74th trial monitoring report details day 129 and 130 of the trial of Alaa M. in Frankfurt, Germany. On the first trial day this week, a new witness appeared in court. P38 seemed distracted throughout the session. Until he was reminded by the Judges of details from the police transcript, P38 frequently omitted details in his testimony. He denied that he or his family were threatened and said that Christians were between a rock and a hard place; the regime and ISIS.

Although P38 told the police that the Accused had access to the detainees’ section which was restricted to non-military doctors, P38 denied having stated this during the police questioning. P38 apologized to the Judges for his lack of concentration, which he attributed to not having slept for 72 hours. This led the Defense Team to ask for suspending his questioning. The Judges rescheduled his questioning for another day before he was dismissed.

In the second session this week, another witness appeared in court. P39 worked as a supervisor in a restaurant chain and VIP lounges at Damascus Airport. P39 believed that the demonstrations were just in the beginning when they demanded freedom and raising the salaries because it would benefit him, but they quickly turned into killings and kidnappings two months later. When the Judges asked him about his stance on the Syrian regime, P39 listed all the diseases he suffers from.

P39 recounted how he met M. in Damascus, and the Judges were surprised that P39 recalled the event in detail even though he did not remember his own exact age. The Judges questioned whether the name and age he provided were factual information. P39 was very secretive about his work and said that in their multiple meetings, he and M. did not talk about their personal or professional lives, they just had fun. The Judges were skeptical and questioned him thoroughly about the details of his work, then asked him if he worked with Syrian intelligence, which he denied.

P39 recalled that he ceased contact with M. after M. turned away and avoided meeting him several times. According to P39, they only met again by coincidence in Germany. When P39 heard about the accusations against M., the latter told him that they were sheer lies. M. further told P39 about one of his former colleagues at Homs Military Hospital who threatened M.

Day 129 – May 14, 2024

On this trial day, a new witness appeared in court and Ms. Nesrin Shebib served as interpreter. Presiding Judge Koller noted that although the witness was probably able to speak German well, witnesses may need help to clarify certain linguistic nuances not to confuse the Court. Koller prompted the witness to ask for the interpreter’s assistance whenever needed.

The witness proceeded with providing his overall personal as well as professional information. [Redacted name], P38, is a thirty-eight-year-old [redacted information] surgeon. He was born in [redacted time] in [redacted location] where he also grew up. He studied medicine at [redacted location] University from [redacted time] to [redacted time] or [redacted time]. Since P38 was uncertain of his graduation date, he apologized, explaining that he came to the Court directly from his shift. P38 explained that after doctors graduate in Syria, they have three options to complete their medical specialization: The hospital of either The Ministry of Higher Education, the Ministry of Health, or military hospitals. P38 decided to specialize in abdominal and [redacted information] surgery in military hospitals. The Presiding Judge noted that the Judges did not understand the witness well and urged him to speak in Arabic, a request P38 ignored.

P38 floundered trying to chronologically arrange the hospitals he worked in but could not remember when and where exactly he worked. P38 seemed distracted; the Judges often asked him questions and he answered others. The Judges became visibly frustrated with his answers and explicitly asked him to speak in Arabic. Presiding Judge Koller told him that the Court did not understand where and when he worked as neither the Judges, the Prosecution, the Defense, nor the Accused understood his explanation. Therefore, the Judges asked if P38 or his family in Syria had been threatened, which P38 denied and explained that his family lives with him. P38 wasted a lot of time before the Judges were able to get an overview of the hospitals P38 worked in and the time he had spent there.

***

[10-minutes-break]

***

Judge Rhode wanted to know if P38's departure from Syria had anything to do with the fact that he was a Christian. P38 confirmed, adding that the parties in the civil war in Syria “[redacted information]” each other. He explained that as a Christian he was between a rock and a hard place, like the Jews in Germany; on one side, a regime that was using him to make it appear to the world as if it was protecting minorities, on the other side was ISIS, which wanted to behead him. Rhode asked if this meant that the regime [redacted information] in P38's eyes. P38 confirmed and provided the Judges with his statistics whereby Christians constituted 10-16% of Syria's population before the war, and only 2% afterward. P38 concluded that after Syria's independence [from the French occupation], Christians were 50% of the population. “Otherwise, how would Syria’s first prime minister at that time be a Christian?”, he argued. P38 then went on to talk about the 17 million Syrian and Lebanese Christians who migrated to Latin America and built the best hospitals there, Presiding Judge Koller however was not interested in that aspect. Judge Rhode asked whether P38 was an opponent of the regime to which P38 replied that [redacted information]. In response to another question about whether Christians in Syria had a critical view of the regime, P38 acknowledged that the clerics were [redacted information].

Judge Koller wanted to know the differences between civilian and military hospitals on the one hand, and civilian and military doctors on the other. P38 said that the military hospitals were responsible for all cases and received civilians and military personnel for treatment, but they were mainly responsible for relatives of military personnel. As for the doctors, their medical tasks were the same, but the military doctors had their own morning meeting, their own outfit, and a nameplate on which [redacted information] was written, whereas “[redacted information]” was written on the ones of the civilian doctors.

Judge Koller was interested in the repercussions of the war on the work at the hospital. P38 replied that war injuries increased, so did shifts, anxiety, and fear, especially with the latest bombing [in Damascus]. Koller asked P38 to describe the most common types of injuries. P38 said that the situation was similar to what one watches in movies; there were injuries from explosions, soldiers run over by tanks, amputations, and gunshot wounds. P38 wanted to emphasize that he saw the explosion [in Damascus] through the window when he was on duty in Al-Mazzeh. On that day, people in the street loaded cars with victims, both civilian and military, and sent them to hospitals.

Koller wanted to know who transported the injured to the hospital. P38 explained that Red Crescent vehicles, ambulances from military hospitals, and even private civilian cars delivered the injured; everybody who saw injured people on the street transported them themselves. Koller asked about the word “everybody” and whether it included police and intelligence personnel, which P38 confirmed. Koller asked why P38 did not mention this detail the first time he was asked. P38 replied that he already said that “everyone” on the street was helping in transporting the patients, [and intelligence officers were included]. P38 explained that among the injured were prisoners. When the Judge asked him how he inferred this detail, P38 replied that “they” came handcuffed and “those” were removed when they were brought to the ER and they had “their marks” on the hands. Koller asked P38 to clarify what he meant by that. P38 explained that he was referring to the handcuffs’ marks. Koller asked again why there were handcuffs’ marks, and P38 replied that it was because they were firmly tightened. Koller replied, “Exactly, do not assume that we will know without you telling us. So, the handcuffs were so tight that they left marks on their hands.” Since P38 did not mention other details he observed in relation to the handcuffed patients, Koller noted that the Court heard from other witnesses that these patients were also blindfolded, which P38 acknowledged. [Note: P38 often omitted details in his testimony until the Judges reminded him of details from the police transcript].

Koller asked the witness where these patients were placed. P38 explained that there was a special section which he did not - nor was he allowed to - enter. He further explained that access was exclusive for military doctors. In response to the Judge's inquiry, P38 explained that the section was guarded by military personnel, and that he did not hear about the circumstances of the medical care or hygiene there but added that the whole hospital was dirty and smelled of blood.

Moving to another topic, Judge Koller wanted to know how and when P38 got to know the Accused. P38 said that he did in the ER, but he could not pinpoint the exact time. When P38 denied having worked together with M., Koller reminded P38 that in the police questioning he stated that they worked together in cases that required medical consultations from both of their departments, which P38 confirmed.

Judge Koller quoted the transcript of the police questioning where P38 stated that M. told him when they first met that he was “pro-Assad and against the Islamists.” P38 replied that this was possible, but he does not remember anymore. Koller was surprised that P38 forgot what he stated in his questioning in 2020 and asked if P38 remembered that he told the police that he “had great concerns about the police questioning because his brother was still in Syria with his pregnant wife and daughter,” to which P38 replied that he remembered. When P38 confirmed that his family was no longer in Syria, Koller asked if this meant that his concerns had dissipated. P38 denied, explaining that he still had concerns if he spoke out against the regime and his wife or daughter traveled to Syria. Koller acknowledged that many witnesses in court had similar concerns. The Presiding Judge noted that the Syrian regime is seeking international recognition, most recently by returning to the Arab League. Koller added that it would not be prudent for the Syrian regime to try harassing the Court's witnesses. He went on to say that he had the impression that Syrian witnesses do not have a good memory when it comes to what occurred in Syria. Koller asked again about the veracity of P38's statement that M. told him that he was “pro-Assad and against the Islamists”. After thinking for a moment, P38 replied that it was possible, but noted that he came straight from his shift and had not slept for 72 hours. Koller said, “I hope you did not travel by car,” to which P38 replied that he traveled by train.

Judge Koller quoted the police transcript noting that P38 stated in his questioning that he believed the Al-Jazeera documentary because M. was pro-Assad to much extent, and because the fact that despite the access of the detainees’ section was exclusive for military doctors and civilian doctors were not allowed to enter, M. in fact did enter. P38 denied stating this in the police questioning, noting that he corrected some of his statements after the questioning ended. Koller told him that this point was not amended in the transcript. Judge Rhode wondered whether this was a misunderstanding or if P38 did not remember. Rhode then noted that P38 stated to the police that he saw M. several times with soldiers at the restricted area. Again, P38 denied. Koller asked in a different way whether M. had contact with detainees and the section whose access was exclusive for military doctors. P38 admitted having seen M. in the restricted area but not with prisoners. Koller responded that he did not even ask if P38 saw M. with prisoners but simply if he saw M. there. Koller then asked if P38 saw M. alone or with someone and how often P38 saw M. like that. P38 answered that he only saw M. there once and with military doctors. Koller found it strange that P38 stated to the police that he rather saw M. multiple times and with soldiers, but in his court testimony, P38 testified he only saw M. once and with military doctors instead. Koller noted that the police rarely write down something wrong. P38 reminded the Judges again that he had not slept for 72 hours and that his concentration was not good. Koller asked the witness to understand that it is the Court's duty to find out the truth and reprimanded him for not taking precautions knowing that he would be questioned today in court. Judge Rhode was visibly frustrated and surprised that when asked earlier, P38 denied that M. had direct contact with the detainees, but later admitted having seen M. at the restricted area. Judge Koller suggested taking a break and asked P38 to reflect on his testimony during it.

***

[60-minutes-break]

***

After the break, P38 apologized for wasting the Court's time and asked the Judges to understand that his concentration was not good because he had not slept for 72 hours, arrived from his travel in the middle of the night, and his daughter had a fever. Defense Counsel Endres suggested suspending the hearing since P38 seemed tired and distracted. Judge Koller announced a short break so that the Judges could discuss the matter.

***

[5-minutes-break]

***

After the break, Defense Counsel Endres demanded to stop the questioning since M. saw the witness sleeping during the break. Prosecutor Zabeck concurred. Presiding Judge Koller conceded that it would not be sensible to continue the questioning in this manner. Before dismissing the witness, Judge Koller told him that he would be summoned again on June 20 and asked him to travel on June 19 and rest at the hotel before attending the Court hearing.

After the witness was dismissed, Defense Counsel Bonn read a motion to explain the circumstances of chat conversations between the Accused, some of his relatives, and Aktham Suleiman أكثم سليمان. [Note: This issue was thoroughly discussed on Trial Day 138. For more details, see Trial Report #78.]

The proceedings were adjourned at 2:29 PM.

The next trial day will be on May 16, 2024, at 10AM.

Day 130 – May 16, 2024

In today's hearing, a new witness appeared in court and Ms. Sanaa Akkan served as an interpreter, since the witness did not speak German. [Redacted name], P39, was born on [redacted time], in [redacted location], where he grew up. P39 did not know if he was 52 or 53 years old and the Presiding Judge corrected him, indicating that P39 should be 51 years old. P39 works as a chef and lives in [redacted location], Germany. He is not related to the Accused by blood or marriage, but P39 knows him.

P39 said that he did not know why he was summoned to the court session as he was not a doctor. The Presiding Judge replied that the Court had questions for him but first wanted to know personal information about him. P39 recounted that after he finished high school, he performed mandatory military service from [redacted time] to mid-[redacted time]. He then worked 9 months in [redacted location] in his father's electrical appliances repair shop. After returning to Syria, P39 had the opportunity to work at Damascus International Airport at a company called [redacted name], which had a chain of restaurants and a VIP Lounge at the airport. Upon questioning, P39 explained that he was single, [redacted information] Christian. [Note: There was some confusion because the interpreter did not know that Damascus is called “Sham” in Syria and thought it was a region in Syria.]

P39 arrived in Germany in 2015. When Judge Koller inquired about the reason for coming to Germany, P39 explained that the situation in Syria in general and Damascus Airport in particular became dangerous, “and there was no money anymore.” Koller noted that unrest started in Syria in 2011 and wanted P39 to explain what he experienced during that time. P39 said that the troubles started in 2011 and remembered that it was on March 15, since it was celebrated every year by the “revolution folk.” According to P39, there were initially peaceful demonstrations calling for freedom and “raising salaries,” which he deemed good as it would benefit him. However, after two or three months, these demonstrations turned into burning, kidnapping, and killing and spread to all provinces. People moved from hot spots to safe areas and the population of Damascus increased from 800,000 or 900,000 to over three million.

Since P39 did not participate in the demonstrations, Judge Koller asked him about his stance on the anti-Assad demonstrations. P39 replied that he would like to point out that he is over fifty years old, yet feels like a hundred, and that he always needs to drink water and suffers from blood pressure, diabetes, had a heart attack, and a broken back due to a car accident in Syria, “So, excuse me.” Koller asked him about the details of the accident and noted that P39 mentioned his health issues but did not answer the question about his stance on the Syrian regime. After reiterating what he previously said regarding the demonstrations, P39 said that he is against killing and violence, “and that is my personal position.”

The Presiding Judge was interested to know how P39 got to know the Accused. P39 told the Court the details of a story that allegedly took place on St. Barbara's Day on December 3, 2011 in Damascus. In essence, after leaving the church, P39 was about to drive his parked car when it was hit from behind by another car, the driver of which turned out to be M. later, who begged P39 not to call the police and promised to fix P39’s car. According to P39, M. told him that he moved to Damascus recently and needed the car. P39 later met M. at a car workshop and M. paid the repair costs. After a brief conversation at the workshop, they got to know each other and promised to meet later. The Judges questioned the witness in depth about this incident.

***

[15-minutes-break]

***

[Note: The interpreter made a few mistranslations throughout the hearing. This prompted Defense Counsel Al-Agi, the Accused and his interpreter, Mr. Baracat, to repeatedly interrupt the testimony to correct the translation. During the break, the trial monitor noticed that the Defense Team asked the interpreter several times about her origin, which she answered repeatedly. It seemed to the trial monitor as if they were insinuating that she was incompetent, as if they were implying that she was from a Maghreb country and thus did not understand the witness's dialect.]

After the break, Presiding Judge Koller wanted the witness to continue recounting what happened between him and the Accused. P39 recounted that he started to contact M. and they met several times, only one of which preceded Christmas. P39 called M. on December 25, 2011 to wish him happy holidays and ask how M. was doing, to which M. replied that he was busy with work shifts.

Judge Koller noted that P39 testified that after the holidays he met with M. every week or ten days and wanted to know how long their contact lasted. P39 said that their contact lasted approximately until August [2012], when P39 suffered a viral infection and was bedridden in his hometown of [redacted location] before he traveled back to Damascus the following month. P39 said that M. did not call or check on him, and whenever P39 called, M. made excuses that he was busy. Therefore, P39 decided to cut ties with M. completely, until they met in Germany. P39 recounted that he learned by coincidence that his brother-in-law operated on M. in Germany. When M. learned that from P39's sister, he asked her for P39's phone number and called P39. However, P39 continued, he answered him bluntly. During that call, M. wondered whether P39 was still upset and promised to visit him. The visits between the two families continued until M. was arrested.

Judge Koller asked if P39 spoke with M.'s family about the trial or what he should testify in court, which P39 denied. P39 further denied informing anyone - other than his wife - about his testimony in court and said that he came to the Court confused, not knowing why he was summoned. P39 then indicated that he applied for German citizenship about four months ago and that he was not willing to jeopardize his situation, neither for M. nor for anyone else. Koller wondered whether P39 should learn German if he wanted to obtain citizenship. P39 replied that he tried but failed, noting that there are people who have lived in Germany for thirty years and do not speak the language. P39 took out his medication and placed it in front of him to demonstrate to the Court that he was sick and unable to learn.

When Judge Koller asked the witness what he knew about the Accused personally and professionally, P39 answered that generally his own work was sensitive and therefore he did not like to ask anyone about their work or to be asked about his work. Specifically, for M., P39 knew that he was specializing in orthopedic surgery at Hospital 601. Koller wondered what P39 meant when he said that his work was sensitive. P39 did not give many details. Upon Koller's insistence and in-depth questions, P39 clarified that he was responsible for a chain of restaurants at Damascus Airport, VIP Lounges, and businessmen - none of whom were politicians, as he explained when asked by Koller.

Furthermore, P39 and M. did not talk much during their meetings about their personal lives, but P39 learned some details about M. and his family. He visited M. twice in Damascus when M. lived with [redacted name] but P39 did not like that person and preferred not to meet at M.’s home again. P39 was with M. in the restaurant once when he met [redacted name] [P35]. P39 explained that he knew P35's family. Koller said that Judges sometimes have difficulty writing names, and asked P39 to write P35's last name. After writing it down, P39 explained that the spelling of names in Syria varies depending on the employee.

***

[64-minutes-break]

***

After the break, the Presiding Judge expressed surprise that P39 and M. did not talk about their personal and professional matters during their meetings and wondered if they would rather remain silent. P39 replied that they played backgammon and chess and watched matches. Koller then asked if they talked about their stance on Al-Assad. When P39 denied, Koller told P39 that he had the right to say whatever he wanted in court, but he should not assume that the Judges would believe everything he said. P39 replied that it was his duty to speak, but whether or not the Judges would believe him was up to them.

Judge Rhode wondered whether M. had asked about P39’s work. P39 replied that he would not allow anyone, not M., not anyone else, not even his family, to discuss his work. This drew Rhode’s attention, who insisted on knowing why P39 was so secretive about his work. P39 replied, “Okay, I will talk,” and explained that the road to the airport was dangerous and full of snipers. Therefore, he had to be discreet so that information about the businessmen he was responsible for would not become public and thus put them in danger. P39 gave the example of how it was taboo in Germany to talk about salaries because they were private work-related matters. Rhode wondered if P39 had security duties which P39 denied and explained that his direct contact was with the [redacted name] Hotel — [redacted name] restaurant chain — and that his work was rather about prestige; when businessmen arrived at the airport, P39 and his team would accommodate their needs and handle travel-related paperwork such as passport stamps.

Judge Rhode was curious about how P39 ended up in this position from repairing electrical appliances after school. P39 recounted that he worked as a cashier for six months and worked his way up. His boss then saw his dedication to work and protocols and appointed him as a team supervisor. Rhode wanted to know what P39's monthly salary was, and P39 asked if this would be useful to the Court, noting that it was personal. Presiding Judge Koller intervened, saying that P39 should keep in mind that Judges do not ask arbitrarily but for a reason, as they sometimes have issues they try to resolve. P39 responded that he felt he was the accused, and added that his salary increased annually, starting with 6,500 pounds and reaching 60,000 pounds at the time he left work. P39 noted that the value of the lira was depreciated against the dollar, and that some Syrians now earn around half a million pounds [between 77 and 400 USD] but it is worthless. Rhode said that he did not mean to attack P39 and asked about the nature of P39's work that increased his salary tenfold, but Rhode also wanted to know why P39 was secretive about his work. P39 explained that it was a personal matter. When someone asks him now about his work, P39 replies, “Alles gut [English: Everything is fine]” and does not tell them how many pizzas he sold or anything else.

After that, Judge Koller asked if the Accused knew about P39's work. P39 said that M. only knew that P39 worked at the airport restaurants. Koller asked if P39 told the Accused that he worked in administrative matters at the airport. P39 confirmed, adding that he is an administrative officer at the airport restaurants after all. Koller said he asked for clarification because in the Defense Team's request to summon P39 as a witness, it was stated that P39 worked in the airport administration. P39 clarified that whenever he was asked, he always answered that he worked at the airport without specification.

Judge Rhode said he would like to ask a different question and wanted to know whether M. told him about a dispute he had with his colleague in the Homs Military Hospital. P39 recounted that M. told him in Germany during Easter 2020 that his colleague named [redacted name] asked M. to help armed men in field hospitals, but M. refused and cursed Muslims and that person cursed Christians. According to P39, that person threatened to take revenge on M. for refusing to help. P39 recalled that M. told him that he, his wife, and children were threatened online, including to be put on field trials, and that M. tried to complain about his colleague to the German police but to no avail. P39 recounted that the colleague was from a notorious village called [redacted location], whose inhabitants regularly sabotaged Christians’ celebrations, attacked, bombed, and kidnapped them. Rhode wanted to know if M. told P39 about an unusual conduct that occurred during Ramadan. P39 replied, “Who is Ramadan? I don't know him [note: P39 thought ‘Ramadan’ was a person as it could be a male first name.].”

Upon questioning about the accusations against M., P39 said that he heard about them in the media, where everyone was talking about M. as if he was Syria's entire problem. P39 added that he did not believe anything that was said and that when he asked M. about it, M. told P39 that they were utter lies. Judge Rhode inferred that P39 did not believe the accusations and asked how he came to that conclusion. P39 replied that he relied on M.’s morals, manner of speaking, and his family, as M., according to the witness, was polite and cheerful.

***

[10-minutes-break]

***

After the break, the witness seemed apprehensive about the audience. Presiding Judge Koller reassured P39 and asked SJAC’s and Clifford Chance’s trial monitors whether they would publish the witness’s name, which both denied [Note: there were no other spectators present.] Koller explained that these are NGOs and that there was no press in the audience, and reminded the witness that this is a public hearing. Koller then wondered why P39 was concerned. P39 replied that he had the right to be concerned since M. told him that there was a group threatening people. Koller told him that if he were in P39’s place, he would be more concerned about whether he was telling the truth; since P39 did not remember his age but recalled exactly how and when he met M. Koller questioned whether the witness’s name and date of birth were real or just information he had memorized before coming to the hearing. Koller asked if there was another purpose for the meetings between the Accused and the witness during which they did not talk about anything. P39 replied that the meetings were for fun and laughter, as “the events” [i.e. uprising] imposed on reality at the time. Koller commented that the Accused and the witness did not even discuss this topic [namely, the events]. P39 asked, “What should we talk about, for example? Oh, pity someone died, someone was kidnapped, and a missile landed here?”

Judge Kriewald asked some questions about the occasion on which P39 first met M. She wanted to know whether P39 knew where M. was before the accident, which P39 denied. Since neither the Prosecutor nor the Plaintiff’s Counsel had any questions, the Defense Team proceeded with its questioning. Defense Counsel Bonn started by asking about the day of the accident and whether M. was at the celebration in the church prior to the accident. P39 confirmed that this was what M. told him. Presiding Judge Koller intervened, noting that his colleague Kriewald had just asked the same question and P39 denied knowing the answer, however, Koller speculated, when the Defense Counsel asked and reiterated the question to the witness, P39 answered because he knew that the answer was in the Defense’s favor. P39 replied that he had not understood the question the first time. Bonn resumed his questions and wanted to know who was paying the restaurant bill when P39 met M. P39 explained that they invited each other; sometimes P39 paid and sometimes M. did. The Presiding Judge intervened again and asked the witness whether he worked for Al-Assad’s intelligence and whether the purpose of his meetings with M. was to exchange information. P39 denied, adding that had he worked with Al-Assad’s intelligence he would not have come to Germany. Koller replied, “Or is it because you work with Al-Assad’s intelligence, you came to Germany?”

Bonn was interested in P39's shifts, and asked P39 to describe his workday. Then, Bonn wanted to know who paid P39’s salary. P39 explained that it was Dr. Othman Al-Aidi, the director of the restaurant chain - including its branches in Paris - who passed away three years ago. P39 added that he heard that the company now belongs to the famous hotel chain, Four Seasons.

Presiding Judge Koller noticed the Accused making head and hand gestures in objection to the interpreter and reprimanded him. Judge von Arnim then asked extensive questions about P39's car; its type, price, when and where P39 bought it. Her colleague, Judge Rhode, followed up with more questions about P39's work and the reason for his asylum application. Defense Counsel Al-Agi concluded with questions about the location of the church, its description, the streets around it, and other questions whose purpose the Presiding Judge said he did not understand. Since the Accused did not have any questions, the witness was dismissed.

Finally, Judge Koller informed the parties that his colleague, Judge Rhode, attempted to contact [redacted name] on May 13, but in an email sent today, this person voiced his refusal to appear in court as a witness because he did not want his personal information to be made public.

The proceedings were adjourned at 4:30 PM.

The next trial day will be on May 27, 2024, at 10AM.

___________________________

For more information or to provide feedback, please contact SJAC at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to SJAC’s newsletter for updates on our work