Der Angeklagte gibt alles zu.

Because the full verb is zugeben, which is a separable verb.

In a normal main clause, separable verbs split:

• Der Angeklagte gibt alles zu.

Here:

• gibt = the conjugated part
• zu = the separable prefix, which goes to the end

Compare:

• Ich gebe es zu. = I admit it.
• Er gibt alles zu. = He admits everything.

In a subordinate clause, the verb does not split:

• ..., dass der Angeklagte alles zugibt.

So this sentence follows the standard main-clause pattern for a separable verb.

Here zugeben means to admit, to confess, or to own up to.

So Der Angeklagte gibt alles zu means that the defendant is admitting everything.

A few examples:

• Er gibt den Fehler zu. = He admits the mistake.
• Sie gibt alles zu. = She confesses everything.

The exact English translation depends on context, but admit is usually the safest choice.

Because in this sentence, zu is not a separate preposition. It is the prefix of the separable verb zugeben.

So you should understand:

• zugeben = one complete verb

Not:

• geben
  • zu = give + to

That is why translating the sentence word-for-word as The defendant gives everything to would be wrong.

Because the subject is Der Angeklagte, which is third-person singular: he / the defendant.

The verb geben is conjugated like this in the present tense:

• ich gebe
• du gibst
• er/sie/es gibt
• wir geben
• ihr gebt
• sie/Sie geben

So with Der Angeklagte, you need:

• Der Angeklagte gibt ...

Also note that geben is a strong verb, so the stem vowel changes from e to i in du and er/sie/es forms:

• geben → gibst, gibt

Alles is the direct object of the verb, and it means everything.

So:

• Der Angeklagte = the subject
• gibt = the verb
• alles = the thing being admitted
• zu = the separable prefix

You can think of the structure as:

• The defendant admits everything.

Alles is in the accusative case, but in this form it looks the same as the nominative.

Der Angeklagte means the accused man or the defendant.

It comes from angeklagt, related to the verb anklagen = to accuse / to charge.

In legal contexts, der Angeklagte is usually best translated as:

• the defendant

So this is not just any accused person in everyday speech; it often has a courtroom or legal feel.

Because it is being used as a noun.

German capitalizes all nouns, and that includes nominalized adjectives and participles.
Here, angeklagt is being used like a noun:

• der Angeklagte = the accused man / the defendant
• die Angeklagte = the accused woman / the female defendant
• die Angeklagten = the accused people / the defendants

So even though it originally comes from a participle/adjective, it is capitalized because it functions as a noun here.

Because this is a nominalized adjective/participle after the definite article der, and it takes the appropriate adjective ending.

The pattern is similar to an adjective used with a noun:

• der alte Mann = the old man

But here the adjective itself stands as the noun:

• der Alte = the old man
• der Angeklagte = the accused man / the defendant

After der in the masculine nominative singular, the ending is -e.

So:

• der Angeklagte = nominative masculine singular

Other forms:

• den Angeklagten = accusative masculine singular
• dem Angeklagten = dative masculine singular
• des Angeklagten = genitive masculine singular

German main clauses usually follow the verb-second rule:

• one element first
• the conjugated verb second

Here:

1. Der Angeklagte
2. gibt
3. alles
4. zu

That is perfectly normal German word order.

Because zugeben is separable, the prefix zu goes to the end of the clause.

So the sentence pattern is:

• Subject + conjugated verb + object + separable prefix

No, not in a normal main clause.

In a main clause, a separable verb must split:

• Der Angeklagte gibt alles zu.

zugibt as one word appears in contexts where the verb does not split, especially in a subordinate clause:

• ..., dass der Angeklagte alles zugibt.

So:

• main clause: gibt ... zu
• subordinate clause: zugibt

Yes, you can, but it changes the emphasis.

For example:

• Alles gibt der Angeklagte zu.

This is grammatically possible, but it is more marked. It emphasizes everything.

Even when alles comes first, the verb still stays in second position:

• Alles | gibt | der Angeklagte | zu

So the standard, neutral version is still:

• Der Angeklagte gibt alles zu.

Yes, there can be.

• zugeben = to admit, to own up to
• gestehen = to confess, often a bit stronger or more formal
• bekennen = to confess/profess, often used in religious, ideological, or formal contexts

In everyday German, zugeben is very common for admitting something:

• Ich muss zugeben, ... = I have to admit, ...

In a legal or crime context, gestehen can sound stronger:

• Er gesteht die Tat. = He confesses to the crime.

But in your sentence, gibt alles zu is completely natural and means the defendant is admitting everything.

Not exactly.

Both relate to being accused, but they are used at different legal stages:

• der Beschuldigte = the suspect / accused person
• der Angeklagte = the defendant, especially once charges have been formally brought in court

So der Angeklagte is more specifically a courtroom term.

That is why the defendant is usually the best translation here, not just the accused person.