New trial ordered for Geert Wilders, the entire three judge panel was dismissed on the following grounds:
- Remarks of judge Jan Moorse on Wilders usage of his right to remain silent
- Remarks by judge Jan Moorse that gave a value statement on Fitna
- The court’s rejection of hearing a key witness Mr. Hans Jansen again on how judge Schalken tried to influence him before the trial
- Remarks by judge Jan Moorse that gave a value statement on Fitna
- The court’s rejection of hearing a key witness Mr. Hans Jansen again on how judge Schalken tried to influence him before the trial
AND
During the deliberation time of the substitution court Wilders has filed charges at a local police station against Judge Tom Schalken for trying to influence a court expert witness.
Klein Verzet translated information here
6 comments:
I thought I was beyond being shocked, but I am absolutely speechless.
Why did it take so long after the time of this "dinner party" for this to come out?
How did Wilders end up with an "expert witness" who is "good friends" with a Fakestinian shill who drinks beer and openly admits it is all a ruse to promote socialist agendas? Thank goodness the man at least has the integrity to have outed this corrupt judge before it's too late, but it took 5 months? Why?
And obviously in the Netherlands it is NOT "still allowed to think freely and say many things" indoors otherwise Hendriks wouldn't have felt compelled to spend 20 minutes in tense conversation with some judicial thug over whether he was at risk of arrest for stating his opinions.
The court could not imagine that what Wilders says is in the Koran is really in the Koran. Which means that those sitting in judgment of him haven't even bothered to get off their fat asses and google the damned Krayon online to check out his statements.
They are using Wilders as a guinea pig for an "interesting case", contributing to the threat to his safety, to the disruption of his personal life, to his financial status, as a little experiment apparently aimed at finding out -- what? Whether they can break him? Or get him killed? Further the Great International Cause of Socialism? As an experiment in the effectiveness of threats on the enforcement of censorship? This from a "professor emeritus" at 3 different universities?
These gangsters make the NPR crowd look like pikers.
Great points all of which are valid RRA. Add to this that if current trends continue unchecked, especially demographically speaking, anyone like Geert Wilders WILL be in prison 10 years from now in The Netherlands.
Extension of my final sentence above:
If not dead.
revereridesagain,
The expert witness you are referring to is Hans Jansen, a renowned and in Holland controversial scholar of islam, exactly because he holds views that are completely in line with those of Wafa Sultan, Andrew Bostom and Robert Spencer (the last two were witnesses disallowed by the court earlier).
The host of the dinner party was an old university friend. Evidently prof. Hans Jansen was set up. He described the dinner party as quite awkward. He left before dinners end, after a 20 minute argument with the Schalken.
You should give him some slack. He is not the enemy in this tale.
Gives one a new appreciation for the pain in the ass defense lawyers in the US system.
Kleinverzet
Andrew Bostom and Robert Spencer (the last two were witnesses disallowed by the court earlier).
And now we can see why they where disallowed. They arrogantly felt it was easier to get to Hans Jansen than a Robert Spencer, whose testimony would have been devastating for the persecution.
One would hope that a retrial would revisit the decision on which witnesses may be called, but, as we are seeing, in this absurd show process anything is possible.
Post a Comment