Zurück Menü

Blinde,
weinende
Justitia
  
Albtraum: Gerichtliches Betreuungsverfahren und die Folgen.  Deutschlands erfolgreichste Mobbingmethode mit Staatshilfe.
Gesetzesänderungen sind hier dringend notwendig
!
Ab 10.01.2012 online: www.gerichtlichesbetreuungsverfahren.de
Wie aus einer Mücke ein Elefant wurde ! - Mit Kanonen auf Spatzen schießen! (AG Lörrach)
Wie Nachbarin-X, Polizei, Landratsamt, Amtsgericht u.a. mich in den Tod treiben dürfen!

Startseite - Home
Vorgeschichte
Mathematik-Lexikon
Verfahrensbeginn
Zeitl. Reihenfolge
Ereignisse 2017 ab Juli
Ereignisse 2017 bis 6
Ereignisse 2016 ab 7
Ereignisse 2016 bis 6
Ereignisse 2015
Ereignisse  2014
Ereignisse  2013
Ereignisse 2012
Ereignisse  2011
Ereignisse 2010
Ereignisse  2009
Nachbarin-X
Nachbar X
Nachbarn X
Belastungen
Aktenberg !!!
Kosten
Polizei
Landratsamt  Bau
Landratsamt Sozial
Amtsgericht
Landgericht
Oberlandesgericht
Einzelpetition 2013
Petitionen
Verwaltungsgericht
Staatsanwaltschaft
Europ. Gerichtshof
European Court
Prozessbetrug ?
Datenschutzbehörde
Anwälte
Anwaltskammer
Verfahrensfehler
Keine Zeugen
Betreuung für ...
"psychisch krank"
Stigmatisierung
Heile Welt !!??
Rechtsschutz
Humor
Staatl. Informationen
Hunde
Weinende Justitia
Bestattungsvorsorge
Impressum


For the European Court

Part 4 (Attachments 2.7 to 2.9 and 3)


Attachment 2.7

Question posted on 02/08/2009 12:44:47 (www.frag-einen-anwalt.de) (www. ask a lawyer)

Subject: Problem of incapacitation law

Law area: General topics
Fees: € 41.00
Status: Answered
Views: 160

I received the following letter on Thursday afternoon:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISTRICT COURT xxx -GUARDIANSHIP COURT- (Baden-Württemberg)

Care for xxx (Name) or Incapacitation by xxx (Name)

Dear Mrs xxx,
due to the suggestion by the district office Lörrach the court checked if a supervisor is to be appointed for you. He would be authorized by the Court to exercise your legal matters, as far as you yourself would no longer be to out-reaching capable.

When caregivers order, should such be necessary, you can even work with.
The court will ask the care authority at the district office to contact you and your family.
Here you can get answers on your questions which you probably have.
If you do not want that your family members get the opportunity to react, please inform us.

The health department has been mandated to examine you and than make a report (or certificate) about it. With this report the court will determine if you need a legal supervisor.
The health department will inform you (Date of Excaminitation with a letter)

Before deciding, the court heard you personally and the situation will discuss with you.

Best regards
Trefzer.
judge
Certified court clerk .....
------------------------------------------------------------
I recently lodged a written objection for lack of parking places of my neighbours at the building authorities (commune and district office). In addition I had a conversation with two men of the planning authority from the district office.

I then withdrew the opposition.

After rapid information attempt on Friday (also brief conversation with the judge, who did not have the case file, but remembered of quarreling concerning a building), it is conceivable that my neighbours have delivered over the district office this letter.

What should I do?

I have a studied in which I had to make some certificates in Law.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Answer posted on 02/08/2009 14:08:00
http://www.123recht.net/Rechtsanwältin-Yvonne-Müller-__l104216.html Rechtsanwältin Yvonne Müller Dingelstädter Str. 57, 37308 Heilbad Heiligenstadt,
 
Dear questioner,

I thank you for setting your question, which I would like to answer as follows based on the facts described:

In any case, you should seek a dialogue with the competent judge and explain the situation. Perhaps you were informed why the district administration maintains a necessary support for you . I assume that the facts can be elucidated in a personal conversation.

Anyway, you do not have to fear that a care (actual: incapacitation) for you is placed against your will. Because this must happen only in so far, to the extent and the so long to supervising a care (actual: incapacitation) needs. This is to measure the proportionality principle. Furthermore, you are free also to regulate through a service available, who should in case your own inability to perceive your personal, financial and legal interests. This may be a related, known or friendly person, also a care team.

However, as I mentioned, due to the situation you does not expect that you need a service for incapacitation, you do not even make it obligatory currently thoughts, but think about the topic in the further time.

Therefore, I can only advise for the moment, to make an appointment with the judge to talk about this case. For this I wish you success. Should thereafter (or advance) still questions arise, do not hesitate to contact me.

Until then, I wish you a nice Sunday, and remain

Best regards
Yvonne Müller Lawyer

 

Evaluating the response from asker

Evaluation:
I had phoned the judge. He stated that he is quite burdened in time. I know that and this fact is also well known. Therefore, no further call attempt with the judge. I have researched by phone and personally. I also have mandated a lawyer. And I discovered a very sneaky method that do not even know professionals who have to do with my problem. I will contact politicians to this topic. If this method is widely used, it is certainly often abused. My Lawyer has acted someting. Because this method can be abused, I will not describe them here.
 


Attachment 2.8

Gertrud Moser, ..........Adresse............Tel. ....................

 

AMTSGERICHT LÖRRACH
- Vormundschaftsgericht –

79539 Lörrach

4.08.2009

Aktenzeichen: XVII 9635
Ihr Schreiben vom 28.7.2009, Eingang bei mir 30.07.2009,
Meine gestrige Akteneinsicht


Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

aufgrund eines einzigen Dokuments, das vom Polizeirevier Weil am Rhein am 9.7.2009 erstellt wurde, soll eventuell ein Betreuer für mich bestellt werden ??????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Das Schreiben enthält falsche Aussagen.

Beispiel: Ich soll in polizeilichen Kreisen als psychisch krank bekannt sein.
Ich war gestern persönlich auf dem Weiler Polizeirevier und habe mich informiert. Ich habe dem Beamten den Polizeibericht vorgelegt. Außer diesem konnte er nichts finden.
Heute habe ich nochmals angerufen und moniert, warum ich bei solchen schwerwiegenden Aussagen nicht benachrichtigt werde, wohl aber die Gemeinde Binzen.

Bitte holen Sie selbst bei der Polizei Auskunft über mich ein. Falls Sie doch etwas bekommen sollten, würde ich es gerne erfahren.

Weitere Falschaussagen von Frau Nachbarin-X sind m.E. grundsätzlich beweisbar, mit mehr oder weniger großem Aufwand.

Gestern habe ich in dieser Angelegenheit Anwalt 1, Ort-x eine Vollmacht erteilt. Meine Rechtsschutzversicherung deckt diesen Fall nicht ab.
Seit Donnerstag bin ich entsetzt über die Informationen, die ich nach und nach bekomme.

Mit freundlichem Gruß
G. Moser

P.S. Schreiben auch als E-Mail geschickt.


Attachment 2.5 Translation

Gertrud Moser ...Adress

AMTSGERICHT LÖRRACH
- Guardianship Court -

79539 Lörrach

Case number: 9635 XVII
Your letter dated 28/07/2009, receipt with me 30/07/2009
My yesterday's inspection of files

Dear Sir or Madam,

because of a single document that was created from the police station Weil am Rhein on 9.7.2009, may be ordered for me a supervisor ?????? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The letter contains false statements.

Example: I want to be known in police circles as mentally ill.
Yesterday I was personally on the police station and was kept informed. I have presented the official police report. Besides this, the actual Policeman could not find anything about me.

Today I called again and complained why I will not be notified when such serious statements a written about me, but rather the community Binzen.

Please contact the police und inform yourself about me.
However, if you get a new information, I would like to know.

Other false statements by Mrs Nachbarin-X are principle provable, with greater or lesser effort.

Yesterday I issued in this matter Lawyer Anwalt 1, ......
My legal expenses insurance does not cover this case.
Since Thursday I am horrified by the informations that I get gradually.

Sincerely
G. Moser


Attachment 2.9

Moser, xStraße, Gemeinde B   

Familie x.....
xStraße
Gemeinde B  

04.08.2009

 

Erst gestern habe ich im Rahmen einer Akteneinsicht von dem Bericht der Polizei Weil am Rhein vom 9.7.2009 erfahren und eine Kopie davon bekommen.

 

Daher möchte ich künftig nur noch auf schriftlichem Weg mit Ihnen Kontakt haben.

 

Aufgrund dieses Polizeiberichts erspare ich mir hiermit zunächst einmal die höfliche Anrede und einen freundlichen Gruß.

Moser 

Translation of the Letter to my Neighours Nachbarn-X:

Just yesterday I was informed during an access of a case file from the police report Weil am Rhein from 9/07/2009 and get a copy of it.

I would therefore in future have only written form to contact you.

Due to this police report, I will spare me herewith initially the polite form of address, and a friendly greeting.

G. Moser


Attachment 3
 

Gesamte Anwaltskosten seit 2009

14.230,20 €

 
       
16.02.2016

226,10 €

Lawyer ....................

Anwalt 13

22.02.2016

357,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 14

Sum:

357,00 €

   
       

08.01.2015

150,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 11

28.01.2015

56,00 €

Online-Lawyer

 

02.02.2015

76,10 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 11

02.02.2015

300,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

03.02.2015

700,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

06.02.2015

54,00 €

Online-Lawyer

 

07.02.2015

100,00 €

Online-Lawyer

 

18.02.2015

368,93 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

18.05.2015

700,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

14.08.2015

64,20 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

23.09.2015

492,54 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

28.09.2015

40,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt TV

13.10.2015

100,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt TV

25.11.2015

865,37 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 12

Sum:

4.067,14 €

   
       

07.02.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

12.02.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

06.03.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

01.04.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

22.05.2014

55,90 €

Lawyer .............. Train Fees

 

22.05.2014

200,00 €

Lawyer...................

 

27.05.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

28.05.2014

600,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

09.12.2013

119,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

26.11.2014

226,10 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 10

19.12.2014

699,13 €

Lawyer...................

Anwältin 10

Summe:

4.900,13 €

   
       

12.02.2013

240,00 €

Lawyer ...................

 

27.02.2013

86,88 €

Lawyer ...................

 

16.04.2013

75,00 €

Lawyer ...................

 

07.10.2013

700,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 6

14.10.2013

500,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 6

31.10.2013

- 159,31 €

Lawyer ................... Gutschrift

Anwältin 6

09.12.2013

119,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 7

Summe:

1.561,57 €

   
       

2012

     

19.01.2012

146,95 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 4

16.05.2012

500,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 4

17.05.2012

515,38 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwältin 4

Summe:

1.162,33 €

   
       

2010

     

21.12.2010

1.500,00 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 3

       

2009

     
 

43,00 €

Online-Anwalt

 
 

226,10 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 1

 

226,10 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 2

 

186,83 €

Lawyer ...................

Anwalt 1

Summe:

682,03 €

   

Attachment 4


Gertrud Moser, ................ Binzen, Tel. .....................

Amtsgericht Lörrach
Bahnhofstr. 4 und 4a

79539 Lörrach

29/08/2016

Aktenzeichen 2 C 1446/14 (Amtsgericht Lörrach)
Aktenzeichen 3 S 24/15 (Landgericht Freiburg)
Moser, G. ./. Nachbarin-X Application for Compensation
Contradiction to the enforcement

on 08/24/2016 I got from the bailiff of the district court under the sign DR II 298/16 the letter on enforcement in order of Nachbarin-X and her lawyer.

So I should pay 1,740.00 euros until 15th September 2016

Attachment 1

Against this payment obligation I raise opposition with the following reasons:
  

 

1. 2009 the police station Weil am Rhein created a misleading and false police report commissioned by Nachbarin-X. According to the statemeants of the police, the police has just taken her informations without further examination. However, the police report gives the impression that the police has the same opinion as Nachbarin-X.

Only this report with the forwarding letter initiated an incapacitation procedure effected in the form of a sudden state assault. My hints to the false statements and the proposal to contact the police were ignored.
 

2. Without noting my objections, the incapacitation process was continued, and I was forced to a psychiatric report. Against its contents I complained also with no success. Also were denied counter evidence to the psychiatric report.
 
3. Also, the Regional Court of Freiburg, has rejected evidence to the false statements of Nachbarin-X under my complaint.
 
4. Before this process I have never had to do with a court or with the prosecution. Meanwhile many unsuccessful methods have emerged, although the police report was easy to refute.
That's not my fault.
 
5. Police, District Office Lörrach, Local court Lörrach, Regional Court Freiburg, upper regioal court Karlsruhe, Administrative Court Freiburg , the Committee on Petitions in the state of Baden-Württemberg have denied evidence in my favour.
 
6. According to the law files, there are proofs that i was not properly represented by several lawyers.

Lawyer Anwältin 10 has failed to inform me of the possibility of a written statement of defense. She had a written documention from me where i listed the false statements. To each false statement i wrote the truth or the correction.

In addition, she also had knowledge of the correspondence with Anwalt 7. She interpreted his fraud against me as strange behaviour.

The same also happens with Lawyer Anwalt 12. There are a lot of evidences of his impropriety behaviour towards me.

Therefore lawyer Anwältin 10 and lawyer Anwalt 12 were unfit to stand a trial, because they neglected basic legal activities of lawyers for me.

The procedure at the district court must be repeated and finally evidence be admitted in my favor.
 

7. The alleged limitation favour Nachbarin-X may not have occurred, because she has made new false and offensive vague information about me over the years.
This has nothing to do with exaggerations, as it has the Judge Dr. Puchinger determinded. The exaggerations include basic statements that need to be checked. Then it can be proved that for years family Nachbarn-X was striking, not me.

The judge has asked only a single unimportant question to the defendant Nachbarin-X. She has answered incorrectly. This would also result from the case files. For me, the suspicion arose that the judge has not worked through the whole case files properly.

For me there is no statute of limitations. Although a police report must be deleted after about 1.5 years, I still have to live with this support acts or incapacitation Act. That is not fair.
 

8. The aim of of asset custody of judicial incapacitation procedure is missed.
I had to take two credits.

Attachment 2
 

9. The aim of health care is also missed. This legal case is a huge burden for me and caused health damages.
 
10. I accuse the Amtsgericht Lörrach and the Landgericht Freiburg, the aid to offenses of Nachbarin-X and Anwalt 7.
Instead indicate resulting offense in the documents of the correspondence with Anwalt 7, I had to hand over this correspondence to the opposite party.
 
11. Because I fought for two years unsuccessfully against character assassination in the case files by Nachbarin-X, my information website created www.gerichtliches-betreuungsverfahren.de.
I recommend the Justice urgently to inform there, which serious damages at citizens are caused from the German justice.

On this homepage are several proposals for public petitions to improve the german incapacitation. These laws must be changed because never a german citizen has to suffer over 7 years like me, and this for easily refutes statements.
 

12. By publishing my case website www.gerichtlichesbetreuungsverfahren.de i am showing the unfair activities of my neighbours, the police, the district office Loerrach, the civil courts, prosecutors and my lawyers.
Thus also my reputation is forever damaged. Online information can not be erased.
 
13. From all existing case files that were caused by my neighbour Nachbarin-X and her husband, it is clear, that all evidences were denied in my favour.
I don't have a proof that Nachbarin-X is actually carer for the mentally ills.
Her statements don't fit to a proper representative of this "professional style".
She is not suitable for such a task. This fact is noticed neither the District Office Lörrach nor the judiciary.
A shame for a constitutional state.

The Justice thus acted multiple against fundamental and human law.
Therefore, I will contact the European Court with my special case.
 

14. The amount of the enforcement I donated the nonprofit organization Plan International e.V. on 1 December 2015.

Attachment 3


It is not possible for me,
to make further payments due Nachbarin-X.
That would be the continuation of the mental torture for over 7 years by Nachbarin-X, the police, the judiciary and my lawyers

G. Moser

Part 5


Nach oben European Court 1 European Court 2 European Court 3 European Court 4 European Court 5 European Court 6 European Court 7


Oliver Shanti - Wise
Veröffentlicht am 08.10.2013 von Skogul  https://youtu.be/8F1YwcUP4Ig

Geändert am:   11.12.2017

Impressum

Startseite:  www.gerichtlichesbetreuungsverfahren.de