It is a tabloid article which doesn't necessarily make it nonsense.Why would CB be writing to friends for character witness for a trial that isn't even had a date set , why would a judges ask some one to appear unless they had actually witnessed something of note, With CB incarcerated it would more likely to be a social worker appointed by the prison service. It's a nonsense story because nothing is happening.
It is known that CB does write to people and if he thinks some may wish to speak on his behalf, he is entitled to ask. Just because the German courts have recently been in recess doesn't necessarily mean that there has been no background work taking place both on behalf of the defence and the prosecution.
It would be remiss if that was not the case.
My opinion.
German trials are very different from proceedings in either Britain or America and it is difficult for us to appreciate the nuances exactly. For example the record of events is not a transcript which may be why there is so little information about the DM rape trial. Nor are witnesses necessarily sworn in.
Snip
The lack of formal rules of evidence makes it unnecessary to fill great numbers of pages with a detailed stenographic report of everything that is said at the trial.
The purpose of the minutes is to show the general course of the trial, the observance of the required formalities, and the main contents of statements made by accused, witnesses and experts.
Therefore the minutes contain only the following items:
- the time and place of the trial,
- the names of the judges and other persons participating,
- a brief characterization of the charges and a description of important and required steps and events,
- a record of incidental rulings,
- very. summary records of statements made by the defendant, witnesses, and experts,
- the contentions and prayers of prosecution and defense,
- the sentence ( StPO 272, 273).
The minutes are, the only evidence for the observance of any rules concerning formalities of the procedure.
The record is unimpeachable, except that deliberate falsification of the record may be proved (StPO 274)
The focus is very much on the accused who has the first word and the last should he so wish at trial
So I don't think there is anything untoward about a suspect like CB being able to contact witnesses to ask for character references for him at trial.
My opinion