According to the list of services confiscated from the former Meischberger lawyer Gerald Toifl, there were several phone calls with Wicki and Grasser in autumn 2009, when the case around the Buwog million commission first became public.

According to the list of services confiscated from the former Meischberger lawyer Gerald Toifl, there were several phone calls with Wicki and Grasser in autumn 2009, when the case around the Buwog million commission first became public. At a meeting with Grasser on December 3, 2009, he was outraged because he expected high tax payments because of Meischberger and Grasser, said Wicki, although he had already correctly taxed his income in Switzerland. The asset manager was outraged that the Mandarin account has been blocked to this day.

Judge found new inconsistencies

In the course of today’s negotiation, judge Marion Hohenecker’s precise knowledge of the files became apparent, for example, in an alleged letter from Meischberger to Wicki, who pointed to a Swiss spelling – without a sharp S. Meischberger then showed her a second letter to Wicki in which he had also written «Greetings» – without a sharp S. The judge promptly found new inconsistencies in the letter: Meischberger stated at the time that he had met Wicki through his bank advisor – while Wicki himself said it was through Grasser.

The process will continue tomorrow, Thursday.

The process flow at a glance

1st day of negotiation:

All-round attack by the defenders

2nd day of negotiation:

Republic wants 9.8 million euros back

3rd day of negotiation:

Plea by Grasser lawyer Wess

4th day of negotiation:

Hochegger puts massive strain on Grasser

5th day of negotiation:

Grasser comments on Hochegger’s partial confession

6th day of negotiation:

Hochegger: «Was part of this system»

7th day of negotiation:

Hochegger «dummy invoices» «Mailbox Companies»

8th day of negotiation: «

We would not have made it without Karl-Heinz

«9th day of the hearing:»

Peter, we win this

«10th day of the hearing:

The Masonic Trail

11th day of negotiation:

Petrikovics exonerates Grasser

12th day of negotiation:

«Secret Agent» Hochegger

14th day of negotiation:

Petrikovics defends secrecy of the commission

15th day of negotiation: «

Nobody wanted the Carinthian apartments

«16th day of the hearing:

Starzer: «It’s all a lie»

17th day of negotiation: «

You can’t even do that in the cinema

«18th day of negotiations:

Thornton: «I was simply a messenger»

19th day of negotiation:

«Disappointed and lied to»

20th day of negotiation:

Thornton leaves proceedings

21st day of negotiation:

Payment to Meischberger on instructions

22nd day of negotiation:

Meischberger’s performance in focus

23rd day of negotiation:

Short day of negotiations on suspected bribery

24th day of negotiation:

€ 200,000 was «no bribe»

25th day of negotiation:

The lay judges are getting fewer and fewer

123helpme essays26th day of negotiation:

From «lust suction» to moving to the Linz skyscraper

27th day of negotiation:

Questioning about invoices goes in circles

28th day of negotiation:

Sick broker Plech comes into focus

29th day of negotiation:

Second defendant Meischberger hands out

30th day of negotiation:

Meischberger: Haider «jealous» of Grasser

31st day of negotiation:

Meischberger on the trail of logic

32nd trial day:

Meischberger: Money traveled around the globe

34th day of negotiation:

Meischberger puzzles over Liechtenstein accounts

35th day of negotiation:

Meischberger: Grasser went crazy

36th day of negotiation:

Meischberger describes falling out with Grasser

37th day of negotiation:

Eavesdropping by the judiciary annoys Meischberger

38th day of negotiation:

«Protect the bowl tightly»

39th day of negotiation:

Meischberger speaking for the 10th day in a row

40th day of negotiation:

Meischberger was unusually silent

41st day of negotiation:

Declaration of love in the court process

42nd day of negotiation:

Grasser’s first interview

43rd day of negotiation:

Grasser is still available to answer questions

44th day of negotiation:

Three mothers-in-law and many accounts

45th day of negotiation:

Ex-minister reports Greens and journalist

46th day of negotiation:

Grasser: «For me it was a disaster»

47th day of negotiation:

Grasser: «A job is a job, private is private»

48th day of negotiation:

The «comeback» of Karl-Heinz Grasser

49th day of the hearing: «

Science fiction

«50th day of negotiations:

Grasser is silent

51st day of negotiation:

Grasser survey goes into the final round

Read news for free for 1 month now! * * The test ends automatically.

Comments

Connect with Facebook

The Constitutional Court (VfGH) decides whether the challenge to the Hofburg election goes through. The public hearing started today with the first hearing of witnesses. News.at reports live from trial day one from the court. Negotiations will take place until Thursday, and a decision will be made by July 6th at the latest.

+++ The first day of negotiations for review in the live ticker +++

Briefly summarized: At the beginning, the two responsible district electoral authority representatives (election supervisor and deputy) from Innsbruck-Land were questioned. They admitted that they had prepared the postal votes without additional election observers or that they had opened postal voting cards – but not the voting cards – before 9 a.m. on Monday morning. The counting then only started at 9:00 a.m. The Southeast Styrian district captain, who was questioned later, even stated that, to the best of his knowledge, the counting of postal voting cards in his district had already happened until midnight on Sunday and there had already been a result at that time. In Villach-Stadt, too, the postal votes are said to have been counted before 9:00 a.m. on Monday, as a witness testified. She spoke of a formal error. In the constituency of Kitzbühel, the postal votes were not counted before 9:00 a.m. on Monday, as the local election officer stated. In Villach-Land, the postal votes were again counted on Sunday evening. In the Schwaz constituency, the counts began at 9:00 a.m., as the deputy election officer announced and other witnesses confirmed.

The district authorities who started the count on Sunday are referring to a 2013 resolution that should authorize election officers and other people to carry out voting activities, such as openings and counting, before 9 a.m. on the day after the election. However, the pre-printed text on the protocol forms for the postal vote counting was not corrected by the district electoral authorities concerned, which states that the counting did not start until 9.00 a.m.

So far there has been no evidence of election manipulation.

+++ 6.10 p.m.: The first day of negotiations is over +++

The hearing will continue on Tuesday at 8.30 am.

+++ 5:59 p.m.: 21st witness interview +++

As the 21st witness, the VfGH questions an assessor who is said to have helped with the counting of the voting cards in Schwaz. This is confirmed by the observer on the witness stand. In the session on Sunday it was first unanimously decided that the voting would begin at 7 a.m. in order to cope with the number of voting cards. He came to the count between 9:30 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. An assessor from the FPÖ was also present. He believes that the opening of the voting cards started at 9:00 a.m. and the counting started at around 9:30 a.m.

He did not notice any irregularities in the count. The witness says that the number was counted in groups of at least two people. At least double checks were carried out.

+++ 5.48 p.m.: 20th witness interview +++

The court called a substitute assessor from Schwaz as the next witness. The witness confirmed before the VfGH that he was invited to the session on Monday at 2 p.m. and appeared there. When did the count start on Monday? – so the question of the Court of Justice. «At 9:00 am,» replied the witness. Assessors were also present at the count. He could not find any irregularities.

At the meeting on Monday he had the opportunity to inspect the documents if he had wanted, the witness says.

+++ 5.31 p.m.: 19th witness interview +++

The deputy election supervisor of the Schwaz district electoral authority is called to the stand. He states that there was a meeting on election day and the day after the election. In fact, the count started at 9 a.m. the day after the election, the witness says. The witness actually wanted to start opening the voting cards on Monday at 7:00 a.m. in order to be able to cope with the number of voting cards – there was an informal consensus with the federal electoral authority on this. In the end, however, he decided on Monday to start at 9 a.m., says the deputy. Two assessors took part in the count and helped. The witness announced that they finished the count at 2:05 p.m. – shortly before the meeting on Monday.

From his point of view, there was no manipulation, it had expired, as with any other election.

+++ 5.15 p.m.: 18th witness interview +++

The hearing continues with witnesses from the Tyrolean district electoral authority in Schwaz. An assessor from the district electoral authority is interviewed. The Tribunal’s first question is: Were you present when the postal votes began to be counted on Monday at 9 a.m.? No, replies the witness. Around 5,500 postal votes were counted, he says. According to the election officer, the assessors did not have to be there with reference to the teams deployed by the BH, but it was said that the assessors could have come to the count at any time on Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. if they had wanted.

He was present at the meeting on Monday at 2 p.m., and as an observer he would have had the opportunity to check the voting cards at random before the meeting. The voting cards had already been counted at the time of the meeting and were in stacks in the room. «In my opinion, the matter went smoothly,» says the witness. He was of the opinion that he was signing a confirmation of attendance at the meeting that the minutes were «, I honestly see this for the first time.» He did not read through the minutes because the signature page was passed on straight away.

He does not know when the counting of the voting cards was actually started, as he was not present. He sees no signs of election manipulation.

+++ Short break from negotiations until 5.15 p.m. +++

+++ 4.41 p.m .: «I found out about it in the newspaper +++

At the meeting on Monday, she was given the results in writing and asked about special incidents – among other things, invalid voting results were discussed. Do you know when votes were counted? «I found out about that from the newspaper,» says the witness. At the time of the meeting, she did not know that and assumed Monday morning.

The Tribunal asked: Is it true that not all of the minutes were passed around at Monday’s sitting, but only the page with the signature? As far as she can remember, this is true, the witness said. According to the witness, it was theoretically possible to check the ballot papers. She did not notice any manipulation. The next question is: Did you know that on Sunday from 5 p.m., voting procedures were carried out with postal voting cards? «No,» replies the witness.

+++ 4.37 p.m.: 17th witness interview +++

The substitute election assessor of the Greens, Martina W., from the Villach-Land district, is the 17th witness to answer the questions of the court. Which meetings did you attend? She took part in the meeting of the district electoral authority on Monday at 2 p.m. and was informed that she could take part in the evaluation of the postal votes on Monday at 9 a.m. But she didn’t notice that.

+++ 16:25: No evidence of inaccuracies +++

He has no evidence of inaccuracies – «not at all,» says the witness before the court. The VfGH asks whether the election assessors even knew that the count was going on on Sunday. The election supervisor emphasized that the assessors had been invited to the preparatory meeting to attend the counting on Sunday at 5:00 p.m. and also to attend the final election on Monday at 9:00 a.m. That was also done in previous elections so that the count would work out.

When the FPÖ lawyer asked whether he knew the guidelines of the Ministry of the Interior and was aware that his approach contradicted it, the witness replied with a nod.

+++ 4.10 p.m.: 16th witness interview +++

The next witness is the election officer for the Villach-Land district. He states that the assessors were invited to a preparatory meeting (in April; editor’s note) to attend the count. The votes were counted by his deputy and employees of the district administration, which had already happened on Sunday evening from 5 p.m. The voting cards were locked after the count – which lasted until around 7 p.m. Only he and his deputy would have had access to the room. The election supervisor confirms the previous witness’s assumption that the count took place on Sunday.

+++ 3:57 p.m .: «Counting on Sunday» +++

The results of the election were discussed at the meeting, the counting operations no longer took place, the witness said in response to questions. He does not know when it was counted and who did it. Shortly after 9.00 a.m. his colleague came and the colleague was told that everything had already been counted. He therefore assumes that «the count took place on Sunday».

The time in the protocol is different, why did you sign the protocol? To confirm my participation in the meeting, says the witness. He didn’t read the protocol. He did not notice any election manipulation. He had received the information that on election day from 5 p.m. and on Monday from 9 a.m. the assessors had the opportunity to inspect the documents.

+++ 3.47 p.m.: 15th witness interview +++

It continues with the district electoral authority Villach-Land: Johann G. is called to the witness stand – FPÖ election assessor. Was there a resolution to authorize the election officer and his deputy? The counting is to be carried out by qualified personnel from the BH, that was decided, says the witness.

According to the list of services confiscated from the former Meischberger lawyer Gerald Toifl, there were several phone calls with Wicki and Grasser in autumn 2009, when the case around the Buwog million commission first became public.

Filed in blog | Posted by almayteresa on junio 28, 2020