- In Munich runs since Tuesday morning the trial against the current co-head of Deutsche Bank, Jürgen Fitschen, and the two former chief Josef Ackermann and Rolf Breuer, and other former members.
- The old driving men have not much to say today. Each of the defendants now fights for himself
- The allegation is on attempted process fraud.. The defendants are in already completed Kirch process before the Higher Regional Court of Munich not have told the truth
Off the courtroom by Hans von der Hagen
First day of the trial in Munich
No, they have probably nothing more to say, these five guys on the dock. They were all times as important as they are, and were masters of the German high finance: Rolf-Ernst Breuer and Josef Ackermann were the last two head of Deutsche Bank, Co-CEO Juergen Fitschen directs the Institute to date, and then there are Clemens Börsig and Tessenberg of Heydebreck it. Börsig was formerly Chief Risk Officer at the Institute, and later chief overseer at the bank, Heydebreck was also responsible for law.
These five Sitting on this Tuesday morning as well, plus many defenders. In total, more than 20 people have been place in the three rows are reserved for the defendants and their lawyers. School class size is already. Breuer is tanned as always, Ackermann smiles unusually rare and Börsig? Which is concentrated reading during the determination of the personal of his former colleagues in the documents.
They had all so ever met years ago when Kirch process. The big difference: At that time only Breuer had been in trouble because the late media magnate Leo Kirch had sued him and the bank for damages. The other four sitting now with Breuer on the dock, had time to tell only truthful, as had been with the bank and Kirch
The church dispute, there was a common goal. A pity dryer set requirement fend against the German bank. This Tuesday, the gentlemen can not sit so close in the courtroom – never was the distance between them increases. Now every man for himself
This is what
A comparable case, it did not previously exist in Germany. Current and former head of Deutsche Bank located in Munich at the dock. The Court examined whether the defendants in – have tried process between Kirch and Deutsche Bank to deceive the Higher Regional Court of Munich to ward off a claim for damages for willful immoral damage
What happened - already completed.? h3>
The former head of Deutsche Bank Rolf-Ernst Breuer had the creditworthiness of the media entrepreneur Leo Kirch questioned in February 2002 – and publicly in an interview with the News Agency Bloomberg . A short time later, in April 2002, the church was then broke. Breuer was set with the comments in an interview the then already severely depressed Kirch Group under pressure and force them into the arms of the Deutsche Bank? So it looked at any rate, the late Leo Kirch, who put it in a nutshell as follows: “Shot me Rolf.” Kirch was assumed that the German bank with the destruction of his empire wanted to earn a lot of money.
The Higher Regional Court of Munich came 2012 on the conclusion that the German bank had tried to set the church on the interview under pressure, a mandate from him or from the opposite side, so one of the Kirch creditors to get. It affirmed a claim for damages for willful immoral damage. Breuer and witnesses of Deutsche Bank stressed, however, the bank had no particular interest in the case Kirch. In addition, it formulates once a bank representative outside the former process, but also a doctor would not have to shoot a man in the street, only to have it later gain as a patient. Anyway – the process ended with a comparison, the German bank paid the Kirch heirs and creditors of the Kirch Group 925 million euros. But because Breuer and other top people at Deutsche Bank said the view of the Court, the untruth, they must now answer charges of attempted fraud process. The fraud is only valid when trying because the court the statements of the bankers did not believe.
Why did the Court of Appeal doubts about the statements Breuer and urged the comparison?
Interview Bloomberg TV was broadcast on 3 February of 2002. The interviewer asked, “whether more could you help him to keep going.” “Him” – that was the church, whose group was heavily in debt at the time. Breuer replied. “I think this is quite questionable what all you can read about and hear is true, that the financial sector is not willing to put on a constant basis, additional debt or even own resources.”
During the subsequent investigation and process it became clear that Breuer A few days before the interview had already taken on 27 January 2002, the then Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and his early Bertelsmann CEO Thomas Middelhoff to position on the to speak of the church. Kirch and Bertelsmann were competitors. On January 29 there was also a board meeting at which allegedly also talked about the church. In addition, Breuer church offered on 9 February 2002 that the German bank could act as a shield for the church. The court did not believe that – as shown by the bank -. Was spoken in all these appointments only marginally over the church, especially since the bank had developed plans for how the Kirch Group could be split
Why is the process for the German bank so sensitive?
Even the proceedings before the Court of Appeal had had the suspicion that the bank had used questionable methods in the case of the church to get hold of a customer mandate. The new process could prove that both Ackermann and the acting co-chief hinge plates were probably ready against better knowledge to share the defense strategy of Breuer to preserve the German bank against claims for damages. Such a result would be the credibility of the banking house – shake even further – the last had to answer yes also for manipulation of market interest rates, among others. It could also be that prove the allegations of the prosecution untenable. Either way, it will be exciting.