There's nowhere to hide the 1999 soundtrack

Winfried Sobottka

Murder case Nadine Ostrowski / False conviction of Philip Jaworowski:

Letter from Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann to the lawyer Prof. h.c. Dr. Ralf Neuhaus, Dortmund

 

In a letter dated March 18. In 2014, Prof. Dr.-Ing. to the lawyer Prof. h.c. Dr. Ralf Neuhaus, Dortmund, who acted as defense counsel for the defendant Philip Jaworowski in the Nadine Ostrowski murder trial, i.a. (emphasis added later):

 

Since another cable was found on the phone, which was initially wrongly assumed to be the phone cable from the crime scene, while the actual crime cable has disappeared (as before), In my opinion, the accusation of a fictitious trace can no longer be pushed aside: Why should Mr Jaworowski, if he were the murderer, have removed the actual cable, but smeared an identical-looking cable with sacrificial blood and hidden it behind his cupboard? In order to be convicted on the basis of evidence that he himself had falsified? That couldn't be surpassed in absurdity.

and:

In the judgment I also find no evidence of any traces such as fingerprints of the convicted person at the crime scene. But Mr. Jaworowski's DNA is said to have been found on a light switch (removed and secured by the police), but nowhere else should there have been any traces of him, not even on the corpse or in the guest toilet, where he is said to have throttled the victim from behind to the throat fracture in a square meter of space, additionally cramped by the toilet bowl and washbasin. In view of today's skills in securing evidence, this is very surprising.

and:

Furthermore, according to the judgment, there were no traces of the defense on the corpse, the victim must have refrained from reaching into the noose, etc. She must not even have strained because the choke trail on the neck is - according to the forensic medicine report - clean and straight, while it is usually common for fights between perpetrator and victim to slip the throttle mark (sometimes multiple times).

and:

Also the fact that the victim was not only dressed in nightwear at the time of the crime, but is said to have been in pajamas while her visitors were still there, seems alien to me. What reason should the girl have put on nightwear before her visit left?

and:

Mr Jaworowski's confession does not convince me either. It is - as the judgment also states - full of proven lies, full of gaps in memory and does not explain very important things, for example how he wants to have hit the viable victim, while he is said to have stood opposite her, "at least three times" on practically the same spot on the top of the head, which is practically impossible even after my life experience.

and:

 

All in all, I come to the conclusion that the assertion by Winfried Sobottka, presented on many pages on the Internet, that Mr Jaworowski was just foisted on the murder does not seem unfounded.
So my question to you:
In view of the circumstances described, what makes you so sure that Philip is Nadine Ostrowski's murderer?

I would be very grateful for an answer and am available at XXXXXXXXXXXX or by email at [email protected] for any questions.

With best regards

your

Andreas Wittmann

———————————————————————-

The full letter can be viewed at:

http://mordfallnadine.wordpress.com/die-briefe-des-prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann/prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann-an-rechtsanwalt-prof-hc-dr-ralf-neuhaus- Dortmund/

 

Published in Ida Haltaufderheide, Murder Case Nadine Ostrowski, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann | Tagged Dortmund, Dr. Rudolf Sponsel, Student Council Jura Uni Bochum, Student Council Jura Uni Regensburg, Student Council Jura Uni Wuppertal, Gabriele Wolff, Gustl Mollath, Harry Wörz, Horst Arnold, Ida Haltaufderheide, Jörg Kachelmann, Karen Haltaufderheide, Opablog, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann to lawyer Prof. h.c. Dr. Ralf Neuhaus, Prof. Henning Ernst Müller, Lawyer Dr. h.c. Gerhard Strate, Ulvi Kulac | Leave a comment

Murder case Nadine Ostrowski / False conviction of Philip Jaworowski:

Letter from Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann to the lawyer Rudolf Esders, Essen

 

In a letter dated March 18. In 2014, Prof. Dr.-Ing. to the lawyer Rudolf Esders, Essen, who acted as public defender of the defendant Philip Jaworowski in the murder trial of Nadine Ostrowski, i.a. (emphasis added later):

 

Since another cable was found on the phone, which was initially wrongly assumed to be the phone cable from the crime scene, while the actual crime cable has disappeared (as before), In my opinion, the accusation of a fictitious trace can no longer be pushed aside: Why should Mr Jaworowski, if he were the murderer, have removed the actual cable, but smeared an identical one with sacrificial blood and hidden it behind his cupboard? In order to be convicted on the basis of evidence that he himself had falsified? That couldn't be surpassed in absurdity.

and:

In the judgment I also find no evidence of any traces such as fingerprints of the convicted person at the crime scene. But Mr. Jaworowski's DNA is said to have been found on a light switch (removed and secured by the police), but nowhere else should there have been any traces of himnot even on the corpse or in the guest toilet, where he is said to have throttled the victim from behind to the fracture of the throat, in one square meter of space, additionally cramped by the toilet bowl and washbasin. In view of today's skills in securing evidence, this is very surprising.

and:

Furthermore, according to the judgment, there were no traces of the defense on the corpse, the victim must therefore have refrained from reaching into the noose, etc. She must not even have strained because the choke trail on the neck is - according to the forensic medicine report - clean and straight, while it is otherwise common that the fights between perpetrator and victim lead to a (sometimes multiple) slipping of the throttle mark.

and:

Also the fact that the victim was not only dressed in nightwear at the time of the crime, but is said to have been in pajamas while her visitors were still there, seems alien to me. What reason should the girl have put on nightwear before her visit left?

and:

Mr Jaworowski's confession does not convince me either. It is - as the judgment also states - full of proven lies, full of gaps in memory and does not explain very important things, for example how he wants to have hit the viable victim, while he is said to have stood opposite her, "at least three times" on practically the same spot on the top of the head, which is practically impossible even after my life experience.

and:

 

All in all, I come to the conclusion that the assertion by Winfried Sobottka, presented on many pages on the Internet, that Mr Jaworowski was just foisted on the murder does not seem unfounded.
So my question to you:
In view of the circumstances described, what makes you so sure that Philip is Nadine Ostrowski's murderer?

I would be very grateful for an answer and am available at XXXXXXXXXXXX or by email at [email protected] for any questions.

With best regards

your

Andreas Wittmann

———————————————————————-

The full letter can be viewed at:

http://mordfallnadine.wordpress.com/die-briefe-des-prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann/prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann-an-rechtsanwalt-rudolf-esders-essen/

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged Dr. Rudolf Sponsel, Essen, Student Council Jura Uni Bochum, Student Council Jura Uni Regensburg, Student Council Jura Uni Wuppertal, Gabriele Wolff, Gustl Mollath, Harry Wörz, Horst Arnold, Ida Haltaufderheide, Jörg Kachelmann, Karen Haltaufderheide, Opablog, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann, Prof. Henning Ernst Müller, Lawyer Dr. h.c. Gerhard Strate, lawyer Rudolf Esders, Ulvi Kulac | Leave a comment

Murder case Nadine Ostrowski / False conviction of Philip Jaworowski:

Letter from Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann to the lawyer Roland Pohlmann, Iserlohn

 

In a letter dated March 18. In 2014, Prof. Dr.-Ing. to the lawyer Roland Pohlmann, Iserlohn, who represented the accessory prosecution against the defendant Philip Jaworowski in the Nadine Ostrowski murder trial, among others (emphasis added afterwards):

 

Since another cable was found on the phone, which was initially wrongly assumed to be the phone cable from the crime scene, while the actual crime cable has disappeared (as before), In my opinion, the accusation of a fictitious trace can no longer be pushed aside: Why should Mr Jaworowski, if he were the murderer, have removed the actual cable, but smeared an identical one with sacrificial blood and hidden it behind his cupboard? In order to be convicted on the basis of evidence that he himself had falsified? That couldn't be surpassed in absurdity.

and:

In the judgment I also find no evidence of any traces such as fingerprints of the convicted person at the crime scene. But Mr. Jaworowski's DNA is said to have been found on a light switch (removed and secured by the police), but nowhere else should there have been any traces of him, not even on the corpse or in the guest toilet, where he is said to have throttled the victim from behind to the throat fracture in a square meter of space, additionally cramped by the toilet bowl and washbasin. In view of today's skills in securing evidence, this is very surprising.

and:

Furthermore, according to the judgment, there were no traces of the defense on the corpse, the victim must have refrained from reaching into the noose, etc. She must not even have strained because the choke trail on the neck is - according to the forensic medicine report - clean and straight, while it is otherwise common that the fights between perpetrator and victim lead to a (sometimes multiple) slipping of the throttle mark.

and:

Also the fact that the victim was not only dressed in nightwear at the time of the crime, but is said to have been in pajamas while her visitors were still there, seems alien to me. What reason should the girl have put on nightwear before her visit left?

and:

Mr Jaworowski's confession does not convince me either. It is - as the judgment also states - full of proven lies, full of gaps in memory and does not explain very important things, for example how he wants to have hit the viable victim, while he is said to have stood opposite her, "at least three times" on practically the same spot on the top of the head, which is practically impossible even after my life experience.

and:

 

All in all, I come to the conclusion that the assertion by Winfried Sobottka, presented on many pages on the Internet, that Mr Jaworowski was only foisted on the murder does not seem unfounded.
So my questions to you: As a representative of the secondary prosecution, aren't you also interested in the fact that the cruel act is really cleared up?
In view of the circumstances described, what makes you so sure that Philip is Nadine Ostrowski's murderer?

I would be very grateful for an answer and am available at XXXXXXXXXXXX or by email at [email protected] for any questions.

With best regards

your

Andreas Wittmann

———————————————————————-

The full letter can be viewed at:

http://mordfallnadine.wordpress.com/die-briefe-des-prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann/prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann-an-rechtsanwalt-roland-pohlmann-iserlohnhden-farhat/

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged Dr. Rudolf Sponsel, Student Council Jura Uni Bochum, Student Council Jura Uni Regensburg, Student Council Jura Uni Wuppertal, Gabriele Wolff, Gustl Mollath, Ida Haltaufderheide, Iserlohn, Karen Haltaufderheide, Opablog, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann, Prof. Henning Ernst Müller, Lawyer Dr. h.c. Gerhard Strate, lawyer Roland Pohlmann | Leave a comment

Murder case Nadine Ostrowski / False conviction of Philip Jaworowski:

Letter from Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann to the lawyer Heike Tahden-Farhat

 

In a letter dated March 18. In 2014, Prof. Dr.-Ing. to the lawyer Heike Tahden-Fahrhat, who represented the accessory prosecution against the defendant Philip Jaworowski in the Nadine Ostrowski murder trial, among others (emphasis added afterwards):

 

Since another cable was found on the phone, which was initially wrongly assumed to be the phone cable from the crime scene, while the actual crime cable has disappeared (as before), In my opinion, the accusation of a fictitious trace can no longer be pushed aside: Why should Mr Jaworowski, if he were the murderer, have removed the actual cable, but smeared an identical-looking cable with sacrificial blood and hidden it behind his cupboard? In order to be convicted on the basis of evidence that he himself had falsified? That couldn't be surpassed in absurdity.

and:

In the judgment I also find no evidence of any traces such as fingerprints of the convicted person at the crime scene. But Mr. Jaworowski's DNA is said to have been found on a light switch (removed and secured by the police), but nowhere else should there have been any traces of himnot even on the corpse or in the guest toilet, where he is said to have throttled the victim from behind to the fracture of the throat, in one square meter of space, additionally cramped by the toilet bowl and washbasin. In view of today's skills in securing evidence, this is very surprising.

and:

Furthermore, according to the judgment, there were no traces of the defense on the corpse, the victim must have refrained from reaching into the noose, etc. She must not even have strained because the choke trail on the neck is - according to the forensic medicine report - clean and straight, while it is usually common for fights between perpetrator and victim to slip the throttle mark (sometimes multiple times).

and:

Also the fact that the victim was not only dressed in nightwear at the time of the crime, but is said to have been in pajamas while her visitors were still there, seems alien to me. What reason should the girl have had to put on nightwear before her visit left?

and:

Mr Jaworowski's confession does not convince me either. It is - as the judgment also states - full of proven lies, full of gaps in memory and does not explain very important things, for example how he wants to have hit the viable victim, while he is said to have stood opposite her, "at least three times" on practically the same spot on the top of the head, which is practically impossible even after my life experience.

and:

 

All in all, I come to the conclusion that the assertion by Winfried Sobottka, presented on many pages on the Internet, that Mr Jaworowski was only foisted on the murder does not seem unfounded.
So my questions to you: As a representative of the secondary prosecution, aren't you also interested in the fact that the cruel act is really cleared up?
In view of the circumstances described, what makes you so sure that Philip is Nadine Ostrowski's murderer?

I would be very grateful for an answer and am available at XXXXXXXXXXXX or by email at [email protected] if you have any questions.

With best regards

your

Andreas Wittmann

———————————————————————-

The full letter can be viewed at:

http://mordfallnadine.wordpress.com/die-briefe-des-prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann/prof-dr-ing-andreas-wittmann-an-rechtsanwaltin-heike-tahden-farhat/

 

 

Published in Murder Case Nadine Ostrowski, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann, lawyer Heike Tahden-Farhat | Tagged Dr. Rudolf Sponsel, Student Council Jura Uni Bochum, Student Council Jura Uni Regensburg, Student Council Jura Uni Wuppertal, Gabriele Wolff, Gustl Mollath, Ida Haltaufderheide, Karen Haltaufderheide, murder case Nadine Ostrowski, Opablog, Philip Jaworowski, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wittmann, Prof. Henning Ernst Müller, Lawyer Dr. h.c. Gerhard Strate, lawyer Heike Tahden-Farhat | Leave a comment