Berlin, 03.05.2019

 
 
Polizeibericht, Seite 21:
Hr. Dr. N. wurde als Beschuldigter einer fahrlässigen Körperverletzung vor Ort mündlich belehrt, er äußerte, dass die Fußgängerampel Rotlicht anzeigte, als er abbog.
Sir. Dr. N. was verbally notified as a defendant of negligent bodily harm, he said that pedestrian lights indicated a red light when he drove off.

H. G., Beifahrerin bei Herrn Dr. N.
Polizeibericht, Seite 102. Interrogation of H. G. on 01/22/2019:
Ich war Beifahrerin bei Herrn Dr. N. im Fahrzeug.
Wir fuhren von der P. str. gegen 17:30 Uhr los. Unsere Fahrt ging über den Rathenauplatz in die Habertusallee, bis zur Warmbrunner Str. Dort wollte Herr Dr. N. links abbiegen und stand dazu vor dem Kreuzungbereich. Ich konzentrierte mich auf den Gegenverkehr und sagte dann zu ihm: „Du kannst jetzt wohl fahren“. Er sagte darauf: „Ich warte noch einen Augenblick auf die Ampel. Dort gibt es einen Ampel mit einem grünen Pfeil. Als diese Ampel grün war bog er links ab. Kurz darauf hörte ich einen Aufpall und sah wie Jemand auf die Motorhaube fiel. Herr Dr. N. bremste sofort beim Aufprallgeräusch und kam zum Stehen.
I was a passenger with Dr. N. in the car.
We went from P. str. around 5:30 p.m. Our journey continued through Rathenauplatz along the Habertusallee, to Warmbrunner Street. There, Dr. N. turned left and stood in front of the intersection. I focused on the oncoming traffic, and then told him: "You can now go completely." He said: “I will wait another minute at the traffic lights. There is a traffic light with a green arrow. As this traffic light turned green, he turned left. Soon after, I heard a collision and saw that someone had fallen on the hood. Dr. N. immediately braked on impact and stopped.

Absolutely everything, starting from the place where they drove up to the Habertusallee / Warmbrunner Str. - delirium and lies.
1.    A strange dialogue in a car about a green arrow with a driver, whose driving experience is the floor of his life.
2.    A strange stopping place for the turn: in front of the intersection, given that the driver's driving experience is the floor of his life.
3.    A strange wait on the spot, given the lack of oncoming traffic, from the words of H. G., who tells him: „Du kannst jetzt wohl fahren“ (you can drive now).
4.    Strange his answer: «Ich warte noch einen Augenblick auf die Ampel. Dort gibt es einen Ampel mit einem grünen Pfeil» (I'll wait a minute at the traffic lights. Is there a traffic light here with a green arrow?).

So strange and crazy that it should become clear to anyone: it could not take place, this dialogue. It is thought up from beginning to end. It simply could not be. There was no dialogue, no stop at the intersection, nor to the intersection; there was an entrance into the turn at a speed, as it should have been if Dr. N. had seen that a man was passing into his green light. Why didn’t the police oppose this dialogue retold by fellow traveler N. ?!

Measurements taken by me and my friend at this intersection show that if, as witness witness Dr. N. - N.G. tells, he went when he waited for the green arrow, then he went on red, since the green arrow only lights up 2 seconds after Dr. N. was already burning red.

The speed of Dr. N. contradicts the testimony of his fellow traveler. From the place where he supposedly stood and expected a green arrow, a speed sufficient to bring down a person and a person fell on the hood of a car cannot be gained unless the gas pedal is fully pressed into the floor. But then we get a complete contradiction to the words of witness A., who told the police that the car of Dr. N. «langsam einbog» (slowly turned)

«Herr Dr. N. bremste sofort beim Aufprallgeräusch und kam zum Stehen» (Dr. N. immediately braked on impact and stopped) - also a lie. From the place of the collision to the place where Mom was hit by his car - 19 meters.

And a little further, in the same testimony of H. G .:
Polizeibericht, Seite 102. Interrogation H. G. on 22.01.2019:
Eine weitere Dame kam auf Herrn N. zu und sagte: „Sie konnten die Frau nicht sehen, Sie ist bei Rot über die Ampel“. Another woman approached N. and said: "You could not see the woman, she crossed road to a red traffic light."

This approached Dr. N., before that standing at the traffic light A.

Testimony of K. W., Beifahrerin im Fahrzeug von Frau K. - a car that just drove up to a traffic light and in front of which was a mother who was hit on the road.
Polizeibericht, Seite 115. Допрос K. W. от 08.01.2019:
Es kam sofort eine junge Frau auf uns zu und sagte sie habe die Frau gesehen wie sie quer über die Straße einige Meter hinter der Ampel über die Straße ging und vor dem Auto erfasst wurde.
The young woman immediately came up to us and said that she saw a woman crossing the street a few meters from the traffic lights and falling under the car.

Where does witness "A" hyperactivity come from?

Lie N. and his fellow traveler - understandably.
But, witness A., the one who stood in front of the red traffic light ?! What for? She just killed a man in front of her ?!

From her testimony:

1. The car of Dr. N. drove slowly.
2. It was dark, rain, nothing was visible. Driver N. could not see the pedestrian. The pedestrian was dressed in the dark.
3. The direction of the pedestrian.
4. A pedestrian crossed the road to a red light for pedestrians.
5. The pedestrian ran across the road.
6. The place where the pedestrian fell on the road.
7. BMW
 
To item 1.
Polizeibericht, Seite 96. Interrogation A. of January 15, 2019:
Als die Frau gerade an meinem Auto vorbei lief, wurde diese direkt neben mir von dem Auto, welches in die Strasse langsam einbog/ entgegenkam erfasst. Das Auto traf die Fußgängerin mit dem vorderen linken Kotflügel. Sie landete mit Oberkörperbereich auf der Motorhaube, ich glaube ihr Gesicht schlug dort nicht auf. Dur den Aufprall wurde sie schräg nach hinten geschleudert und fiel rückwärts hinter meinem stehendem Fahrzeug. Es gab ein ganz dumpfes Geräusch, so als ob der Kopf auf die Strasse aufprallt.
When a woman just ran past my car, she was hit directly by a car that slowly turned into the street. The car hit the pedestrian with the front left wing. She landed with a hood on the hood, I think her face didn't hit there. The blow was slanted backward and fell behind my stationary car. There was a very muffled sound, as if the head had hit the road.

To bring down a pedestrian so that he falls on the hood, you need a speed of 30-35 km / h. At a speed of 30-35 km / h, entering a bend is not slow. It is fast. It's very fast. This is superfast. Especially in the dark, especially in the rain, especially if you are not Schumacher 30 years. At a speed of 20-25, a mother shot down by N. would not have flown onto the hood of his car. Maximum, would break his legs. At a speed of 5-10-15 - would get off with a slight fracture, fear and bruises. 5-10-15 km / h is slow. Consequently, witness A. is lying.

To item 2.
Polizeibericht, Seite 17:
Aufgrund der schlechten Sichtverhältnisse (Dunkelheit/Regen) sah er die Fußgängerin (Bekleidung, dunkel) nicht und erfasste diese mit seinem PKW; Opel, B-.
Due to poor visibility (darkness / rain), he did not see the pedestrian (clothes dark) and hit him with his car Opel, B-.

Polizeibericht, Seite 21:
Sie gab weiterhin an, dass Herr Dr. N., die Fußgängerin nicht sehen konnte, da es regnete, Dunkelheit herrschte und diese dunkel gekleidet war.
She also stated that Dr. N. could not see the pedestrian since it was raining, it was dark and the pedestrian was dressed in dark clothes.

Polizeibericht, Seite 96. Interrogation A. of January 15, 2019:
Es war zu der Zeit dunkel, es regnete stark, die Strasse ist auch sehr dunkel, nicht gut beleuchtet und die Dame war auch dunkel bekleidet.
Sie trug eine dunkle gesteppte Jacke, beige- braune gefütterte knöchelhohe Schuhe und eine dunkle Hose.
At that time, it was dark , it was raining heavily, the street is also very dark, not very well lit , and the lady was also dressed in dark .
She was wearing a dark quilted jacket, beige and brown shoes with ankle lining and dark trousers.

The pedestrian was illuminated: a) with the headlights of her car, b) with the headlights of the car standing behind her car, c) with the headlights of the car of another N., e) with the light of street lamps, e) with the light of the perimeter of the restaurant.

«...die Strasse ist auch sehr dunkel» (the street was also very dark) - says police A. Not just dunkel (dark) , but sehr dunkel (very dark) ! At the same time, witness A. describes in detail the clothes of the pedestrian: the color of trousers, shoes, the color and style of the jacket. If it pours rain and dark so that you can’t see a person crossing the road, then how did she see all this?

Consequently, witness A. is lying about the darkness at the intersection.
(photos: a) places of the accident at night, and b) places of the accident at night in the rain, are attached)

To item 3.
Polizeibericht, Seite 98. Interrogation A. of January 15, 2019:

Witness A. draws a pedestrian traffic pattern that does not correspond to any logic: according to her drawing in the police protocol, my mother reaches the traffic light and starts to cross it diagonally in the direction that she could not go: the bus stop that my mother went to is at the other side. Where witness A. draws - park and night, there is nothing: there is no bus stop, my mother could not go there. If she went there, according to Scheme A., then there is no point in reaching the intersection and crossing the road at the traffic lights - the road could have been crossed long before this intersection. Figure A. is contrary to meaning. Since witness A. did not know where she was going from (before the traffic light), and where (after the traffic light) her mother planned to go, she draws such a scheme. But figure A. proves only one thing: witness A. is lying.

To item 4.
Polizeibericht, Seite 17:
Die Fußgängerin Frau Gelfand überquerte, bei Rotabstrahlender Lichtzeichenanlage, hinten der dortigen Füßgängerfurt quer die Fahrbahn der Warmbrunner Str. aus nördlicher Richtung kommend und lief in südliche Richtung.
Ms. Gelfand pedestrian crossed the roadway of Warmbrunner Street, following the red traffic light , at the rear of the pedestrian crossing from the north and ran into southbound.

Polizeibericht, Seite 21:
Die Fußgängerampel zeigte bereits Rotlicht an. Sie wunderte sich, dass Fußgängerin jetzt noch die Fahrbahn überquert.
Traffic light for pedestrians already showed a red light . She was surprised that the pedestrian is now crossing the road.

Polizeibericht, Seite 96. Interrogation A. of January 15, 2019:
Vor mir befand sich die Fußgängerfurt. Auf ein Mal lief dann schnell eine ältere Dame zwischen der Haltelinie und hinter Fußgängerfurt quer bei Rot über die Strasse.
Die Fußgängerampel wurde gerade rot, ich denke deshalb ist sie auch gerannt und es regnete sehr stark.
Before me was a pedestrian crossing. Suddenly an elderly woman quickly ran across the street between the stop line and the pedestrian crossing in red.
The pedestrian traffic light just turned red , so I think that's why she ran too, and it was raining heavily.

At one point in the police testimony, A. says that mom was crossing road to a burning red light. In the other, that she switched to red that just caught fire.

To paragraph 5.
Polizeibericht, Seite 17:
Die Fußgängerin Frau Gelfand überquerte, bei Rotabstrahlender Lichtzeichenanlage, hinten der dortigen Füßgängerfurt quer die Fahrbahn der Warmbrunner Str. aus nördlicher Richtung kommend und lief in südliche Richtung.
Pedestrian Ms. Gelfand crossed the roadway of Warmbrunner Street, following the side of the burning red traffic light, at the rear of the pedestrian crossing from the north and ran to southbound.

Polizeibericht, Seite 21:
Frau A. befuhr mit ihrem Pkw B- die Warmbrunner Str. in Richtung Hubertusallee kurz vor dem Kreuzungsbereich lief die Fußgängerin vor ihr, von rechts nach links über die Fahrbahn, hinter der Fußgängerfurt schräg rüber.
Frau A. was driving her B- car along Warmbrunner Street. to Hubertusallee to the intersection, the pedestrian in front of her ran from right to left along the road behind the crosswalk diagonally.

Polizeibericht, Seite 96. Interrogation A. of January 15, 2019:
Vor mir befand sich die Fußgängerfurt. Auf ein Mal lief dann schnell eine ältere Dame zwischen der Haltelinie und hinter Fußgängerfurt quer bei Rot über die Strasse.
Die Fußgängerampel wurde gerade rot, ich denke deshalb ist sie auch gerannt und es regnete sehr stark.
Before me was a pedestrian crossing. Suddenly an elderly woman quickly ran across the street between the stop line and behind the pedestrian crossing in red.
The pedestrian traffic light only turned red, so I think that’s why it also ran , and it was raining heavily.

Due to her age, mom did not run. I didn’t run at traffic lights, I didn’t run around the streets, I didn’t run around the shops, I didn’t run around the house. She walked. Stressing that Mom “crossed the road,” witness A. shows that the pedestrian understood that she was doing something wrong and, running across, wants to finish her wrong / illegal act faster. And even more so, my mother did not run fast, as A: says about this: «...ein Mal lief dann schnell eine ältere Dame». («... suddenly an elderly woman ran quickly»)

Do policeman often see old women of 85 years running at a traffic light, even if there is a stream of cars on them? Ask for an investigative experiment in a police station to run a couple of meters of 83-year-old dr. N. or 82-year-old fellow traveler H. G. I doubt that they will succeed.
In addition, due to illness, my mother would not run, even if it was very necessary. (Auszug aus den medizinischen Daten 2016-2018 from the mother’s orthopedic surgeon (photos 1 and 2) and Schwerbehinderte Ausweis with paragraphs “B” and “G” * (photo 3) - attached). A. - lying, the police - believing.

To item 6:
A., describing the accident, says: «und fiel rückwärts hinter meinem stehendem Fahrzeug» («and fell behind my standing car»). How so? After all, the mother’s location after the accident is 19 meters from the scene of a collision with the car of Dr. N. and about 12 meters from the rear bumper of A.

To paragraph 7.
Polizeibericht, Seite 96. Допрос А. от 15.01.2019:
Ich machte meine rechte Seitenscheibe runter und sagte zu einem Herren, der mit seinem silbernen Auto, ein BMW, rechts schräg hinter mir stand und bereits ausgestiegen war, das er hingehen soll. Der Mann tat dies auch. Ich stieg dann auch aus. Es waren auf einmal viele Leute da und halfen. Der Mann/ Fahrer vom silbernen BMW fuhr dann weiter, er sagte mir, dass er den Unfall nicht gesehen hat.
I lowered the right side window and told the gentleman who was standing with his silver car, BMW, diagonally behind me on the right and had already left that he should go. Man did it too. I went out too. Suddenly, many people appeared who could help. The silver BMW man / driver then left, he said to me that I have not seen an accident.
      
At the scene of the accident, behind A.'s car, (or nearby to her right, although 2 cars cannot be located on that stretch of road nearby), according to A., there was a silver BMW, which immediately left after the accident. Why is the police not trying to install this car? 

So:

Why is witness A. lying?
There are two variants:
1.    She shows solidarity with the driver and fenders N., all the more seeing that a woman who has been shot down N. cannot be helped anymore.
2.    Before the accident, she was familiar with N. or a passenger in the car N.: with H. G.

There is still an assumption: before the police arrived, they managed to promise a reward for the correct testimony, most likely the travel companion of Dr. N. - Kh.G. 

Incredibly, the police, to justify N. and to accuse the pedestrian, used all six factors provided by A.: dark hours of the day, rain, dark clothes of the pedestrian, red pedestrian traffic light, running mother, slowly driving N.'s car.
      
The police do not put forward any own versions of what happened, do not double-check the testimonies of N, K. and A. The police believe them all, believe that «Dressed in a dark old woman in a downpour and in the dark, quickly runs diagonally to where she does not need to run, at the red light of a traffic light».

The police repeats several times in different places of the protocol «Alte Dame» (old woman), «Alte Füsgängarin» (old pedestrian), this position is also used to justify N. Hidden meaning: Alte – old, inattentive, distracted, unpredictable. Alte – had already outlived her, so she would soon have died.

Following the logic of the police, you can hit by a car old people, and even more so in the dark, in the rain, dressed in the dark! This is understandable, and this is only their fault. The police even, not at all embarrassed, wrote like this: "If Frau Gelfand had not crossed the road, an accident would not have happened."
But, it is worth paying tribute, the police showed restraint, did not add: “Dr. N., his fellow traveler and witness A. would not have received stress. The city budget would not have suffered losses investigating the death of the old lady.”
Explain to me. If the police do not want or are not able to establish the truth, are not able to establish for what purpose A. is lying, did she have a preliminary acquaintance with Dr. N. or his fellow traveler, then - why do we need the police, the investigating authorities, the prosecutor's office and the court? Why is all this a heap of a judicial investigative system, if I, without all of them, only from the read in the police protocols could establish that the witnesses and the murderer are lying. After all, everything is obvious. Why can't the police and prosecutors come to the same conclusion ?!
After reading, there was at least 1 point that the police or the prosecutor’s office had absolute confidence that the witnesses were lying? So they lie and for all the rest!
Next, this N. or the other will bring your mother hit down. The next witness will be this, or similar to her A. Are you ready for this ?!

Vitaly Gelfand

* „B" die Notwendigkeit ständiger Begleitung ist nachgewiesen.
* „G" die Bewegungsfähigkeit im Straßenverkehr ist erheblich beeinträchtigt (gehbehindert). Das Merkzeichen erhält, wer infolge einer alterungsunabhängigen Einschränkung des Gehvermögens, Wegstrecken bis zwei Kilometer bei einer Gehdauer von etwa einer halben Stunde, nicht ohne erhebliche Schwierigkeiten oder Gefahren gehen kann.

* "B" the need for constant support is confirmed. "G" ability to move in road transport is significantly impaired (disabled). The holder will be accompanied by someone who will help you to walk without significant difficulties or dangers due to age-independent restrictions on walking ability, up to two kilometers with a walking time of about half an hour.

Auszug aus den medizinischen Daten (Extract from the medical record for 2016-2018 from the mother’s orthopedic surgeon (photos 1 and 2) and Schwerbehinderte Ausweis (Disability certificate ) (photo 3) with points «B» и «G»*

Killed a living person. Let it be my mom, or not my mom, even if it’s a complete stranger to me and to you all. I didn’t say a word anywhere that Dr. P.N. chased her by car to knocked down intentionally. I agree that he killed her by accident, just didn’t see.
But why not, the reconstruction, investigation, medical examination of Dr. P.N. the ability to drive a car further?
After all, it was not the dog on the road that was killed. The man died. May be Dr. P.N. in Germany from the untouchable caste? Maybe this attitude is because a foreigner died? Maybe there is such an attitude, because the deceased is not my mother except me and my brother ?! I do not understand.
And it’s not at all that I want the blood of Dr. N. It doesn’t matter to me if he ends up in prison or continues to bring down Berlin old women. I want one thing, let the court and the investigation prove to me on my fingers: my mother quickly ran into the red light of a traffic light, the car of Dr. N. drove into the turn slowly, the street was so dark that in similar weather conditions it wasn’t possible for the pedestrian to move from another car of N. N. no one would see, and regardless of the driver, mom at that intersection was doomed.
And the last thing that is interesting to know: Under the same conditions, if a close relative of the chief prosecutor D. had been hit by a car, would he also peremptorily and calmly juggle with words, explain the uselessness of the investigation?
After 06/11/2019 and the verdict of my lawyer that “the case is legally closed”, I sent all the information proposed here above to almost all German-speaking media in Germany and not in Germany who wrote and talked about my father’s diaries, and who didn’t write and never talked about them. There are few answers, therefore, all of them here.
Today, September 28, it was raining blindly in Berlin. Do you know what "blind rain" is Dr. N., witness A., prosecutor D., police F.? Blind rain is when both the sun and rain. We called him that. Mom doesn’t know about it. Mom didn’t see him today.