[ad_1]
Some ambiguities – FPÖ’s lawyer rejected representation
© WHAT
The former bodyguard of former FPÖ head Heinz-Christian Strache, Oliver R., is said to have framed not only Strache in the spending case, but according to “Kurier” also the now Viennese FPÖ president Dominik Nepp. According to one of the interrogation protocols available to the newspaper, R. stated that he had undoubtedly told Nepp (at the time responsible for the State party’s finances) that “we will convert the accounts”. FPÖ’s lawyer, Christoph Völk, rejected it with reference to other documents.
The case concerns the allegation that Strache counted the private expenses as party expenses (“converted” invoices) and thus damaged the FPÖ. Last Friday, Strache had already indicated in the electoral duel with Nepp at ORF III that Nepp had been informed about false spending reports: the former party leader claimed during the confrontation that the former bodyguard had stated that he had made such “conversions” without his knowledge and Nepp having taught about it.
The “Kurier” now reports that R. actually stated several times during his interrogation that Nepp had been informed about the profanity. He remembers this in 2014 and 2015. “When asked if I specifically told him that false invoices were also presented here, I said that I told him for sure that we would convert the invoices,” quoted the “Messenger”, the former bodyguard of the interrogation protocol.
Nepp is said to have received this information nonchalantly: “He just shrugged and left,” R. said according to protocol.
FPÖ’s lawyer, Völk, rejected the accusations Sunday night in response to a request from the APA. “The implication of Dominik Nepp cannot be inferred in any way from the documents available so far, of which the FPÖ organizations as individuals are aware, as well as from internal investigations (FPÖ, note)”.
R.’s statement quoted in “Kurier” is now seen by Völk as revised: “Kurier’s quote is approximately twelve months old, it was one of the first statements. And it is a completely vague statement made by this co-defendant, Mr. R. , later revised again, demonstrating to the researchers themselves that under Nepp the finances of FPÖ Vienna were administered much more strictly than under their predecessors. “
In his statement, Völk referred to an incident report from the Federal Criminal Police Office (dated September 4, 2020) available to the APA. According to this, R. said in a supplement to the questioning of the defendants that Nepp had tried “to do it correctly”. Nepp also opposed the bills introduced by Strache: “I would like to tell Dominik Nepp that he put up much more resistance,” the minutes read. “This was expressed in such a way that Nepp repeatedly requested receipts and also made payments dependent on the presentation of receipts (…) If part of the money used was purely private HC Straches, Nepp has not paid any money” .
R. also expresses the impression that Nepp was personally sanctioned by Strache for this resistance. According to my information, a company vehicle was ordered for Dominik Nepp and he was willing to pay the higher private cost. Like I said, the vehicle was ordered at the time and then canceled prior to delivery. (…) As I only knew from overheard conversations, It was an educational measure of the party leadership, in my opinion, the HC Strache decided it for itself. The company car was canceled and the driver was canceled. Philippa Strache said in the office at the time: ‘He obviously doesn’t know who got him the job, it’ll be fine look what he gets out of it. The conversation was about the money that the regional group made available to HC Strache and had to be approved by Dominik Nepp as a financial officer ”, said R. according to these minutes.
[ad_2]
