BREAKING: Judges in Geert Wilders’ Free Speech Case Removed from Trial (UPDATED)
The trial of Dutch MP Geert Wilders will have an encore.
In the conclusion to a bizarre trial — in which the prosecution already called for the acquittal of the defendant — Wilders’ lawyer Abraham Moszkowicz today asked for dismissal of the three judges, and his request was approved by the dismissal commission of the court. Now, the trial will have to start over from the beginning.
Moszkowicz asked for a dismissal after the three judges refused to allow Dr. Hans Jansen to testify regarding a discussion he had with one of the judges of a higher court that ordered the prosecution of Wilders.
In May, Dr. Jansen was invited to attend a dinner party together with one of the higher court judges. This judge started discussing the Wilders trial, and his order to prosecute, with Dr. Jansen. Jansen revealed this on his personal blog last Wednesday. Moszkowicz wanted the judges to hear, in court, Dr. Jansen’s impression of this discussion.
Dr. Jansen had testified earlier in this case in a closed setting. Dr. Jansen is one of the foremost Islam experts in the Netherlands. (As is the case in the U.S., judges are not permitted to discuss a case outside the court — especially with an expert witness for the case.)
The court refused Moszkowicz’ request to hear Dr. Jansen. Moszkowicz subsequently asked for dismissal of this court, and after a short session the dismissal commission agreed with him.
Now the trial has been postponed for several months and the news of the activist judge of the higher court has captured today’s headlines in the Netherlands.
UPDATE: On Monday night, May 3, a dinner party was hosted by Bertus Hendriks, a well-known pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist journalist and activist in the Netherlands. His guests were a group of friends from various backgrounds, but each one of them belonged to Dutch left-liberal communities.
Professor Dr. Hans Jansen, one of the foremost Islam experts in Holland, a vocal critic of Islamism, and a celebrated translator of the Koran himself, was invited by Hendriks. Hendriks and Jansen belong to opposing ideological groups, but they maintain a cordial relationship.
On his blog published Wednesday, October 20, Dr. Jansen writes about Hendriks: “Bertus once explained to me that he didn’t care that much for the Palestinian problem. It was more, he explained to me since I am a ‘bourgeois element of a passed generation’ that the Palestinian fate could expose the global structures of exploitation. In other words, he is a friend whose invitation for a dinner party cannot be neglected.”
Is this good or bad for Mr. Wilders….It’s early and I can’t think yet
It is egg on the face of the establishment left. My guess is the case will get dismised to cover there behinds.
The Drama continues.
Having the entire judicial panel dismissed is certainly going to be remembered by the electorate no matter the outcome of the trial. If Wilders is acquited, it will show that the Netherlands really Really REALLY needs a First Amendment to stop this kind of harassment. If he’s found guilty, even after having the prosecutors request dismissal…TWICE…then the electorate will know they have already lost the battle for Western versus Islamic values. Voltaire. Where is he when you need him? Not in the Netherlands that’s for sure.
Voltaire was every bit as opposed to Western European (Christian) culture as any jihadi. As a proto-Leftist, when the chips were down he would have ended up on the side of the Mohammedans against Christians, just as many (most) US Leftist Jews end up allied with Mohammedans in our own kulturkampf (Bloomburg is enough to make any American puke). Christians are the here-and-now enemy, to be put down first, and the Mohammedans can be dealt with later (I’m wondering about their assessment of the odds on this, but there it is).
sad thing is, freedom of both speech and religion is laid down in our constitution.
The charges are utterly idiotic, there’s no law that would apply here, which is why prosecutors initially refused to file charges at all and when forced to made only the most halfhearted effort to make a case before dropping them again.
That said, there’s an article in our constitution that declares defamation of religions as a crime, and anti-discrimination laws make inciting hatred against relgious, social, or ethnic groups a crime.
Those are the laws used to create the charges. The defense argument was, and witnesses for the prosecution confirmed the correctness of this, that the truth cannot be defamatory or causing hatred against a group, or if it does it is not a crime.
Prosecution services agreed with that.
Now the question is whether a judge will agree with that as well, whether speaking the truth can be a crime if someone feels slighted by hearing the truth spoken.
This case could have happened in the US as well. But in the US there’d have been a jury carefully selected to come to the verdict the court desires and no way to dismiss the judges for being crooked.
It can go either way now.
A new panel of judges has to be appointed, and extra care will now have to be taken to make sure they’re impartial or this will only repeat itself.
As such, it’s quite possible the new panel will not even bother to go into testimony and deliberation and accept the decision by prosecution services to drop charges.
But then again, we may also see a new court that’s just better at masking their intentions to convict no matter what plays out in their court room.
It is a double-edged sword.
It immediately puts the entire trial in a bad light, showing it to be the witch hunt that it is.
However, it also gives the prosecution a “do-over,” allowing them to “shop” for sympathetic judges
Sometimes the nail breaks the hammer! We need more people of Geert Wilders’ temper.
I’ve been following the trial as much as I can from the web, and my guess is that the case will be thrown out, or rather not be brought again. Basically as has been noted this trial was brought by the judiciary, and at the end of the proceedings the prosecutors requested that all charges against Wilders should be dropped. Why bring this mistrial of justice again?
My sediments exactly, I’m thinking it will eventually be dismissed s no judge wants to be named or make headlines no matter where they may reside this is nothing more than a political junket for Islamic extremist and if this is dismissed will be a huge set back for them as well and will be heard loud & clear around the world and hopefully more of these court cases will end with the same results Dismissed !!!
Judges here have no say in which cases they get to try. They’re assigned on a duty roster.
Of course there may well be high level wiggling those rosters to ensure a high profile case gets a high profile judge who needs to make a name before leaving the profession and going into practice as a trial lawyer, but that’s not official
1. The case against Wilders was brought by the judiciary (as Michael Margolies noted above), not by the prosecutors who were ordered to do so by the judiciary. The Dutch legal system is quite different.
2. The prosecutors asked for the charges to be dropped but the judges could still have sentenced Wilders.
3. Wilders’ attorney asked for the dismissal of the judges and the commission agreed with him.
It’s not over yet but this dismissal is a great victory for Wilders.
sounds quite corrupt–almost like Belgium’s judiciary.
Was the judge’s name “Sotomayor”?
Who is paying Mr. Wilders’ court cost? Mr. Wilders, to bankrupt him; or the govt., stick it to the taxpayers?
he is paying his own bills (with the help of donations from all over the planet though).
The court and prosecutors are never billed to him as this is a criminal, not a civil, case.
But his own lawyers, his time away from his job, are at his own cost.
Greetings:
At the risk of raining on a parade, if you look at all this as a “the process is the punishment” scenario, we can look forward to more of Mr. Wilders time and economic resources being consumed by a trial that never should have gotten to “square 1″. And, how many of Mr. Wilders fellow citizens do you think have gotten the “Are you really sure you want to go there?” message about speaking out about the proclivities and idiosyncrasies that are Islam? Once again a statist bureaucracy shows that it can turn the powers of government against its citizens with impunity and without any justification.
The removal of the trial judges is a tactical victory for Mr. Wilders but not necessarily a victory for free speech. We need an acquittal on principled, substantive grounds, so that Dutch citizens without Mr. Wilders’ celebrity and resources will be able to advance politically incorrect positions on Islam and muslim immigration without fear of official persecution. If the result of this setback for the Dutch establishment is the dismissal of the case on procedural grounds, the risk of prosecution will continue to impose self-censorship.
The case against Wilders will now go on with doubled vigor. The left demands vengeance for being exposed. Happens to all the whistleblowers.
“The left demands vengeance for being exposed.”
Yeah, just ask Juan Wiliams.
That sure worked well for NPR, et al! Juan now has a three year two mill a year gig, growing respect and stature.
Sounds to me like the wrong party is on trial. It should be this corrupt judiciary that wants to stifle free speech. Sort of like Juan Williams and NPR.
This could have been done on purpose. It is mildly embarrassing to get dismissed or forced to recuse oneself but it is much better than having to continue with that charade trial in front of the whole world.
The WEST (all western nations) need to wake up.NOW!!!!… or face our own demise due to giving permission to foreigners (who are bent on our destruction) to live, benefit from our freedoms, and sue and use those freedoms against the very nation who is housing them and helping them.
Why do we not protect our own freedoms, our own citizens, and our sovereignty. Why are we allowing a radical ideology which has no respect for our freedoms, values, and laws to manipulate us– to control us, to destroy us.
We must not allow our own identity, laws, heritage, and freedoms to be used against us by foreigners who do not care about anything but our destruction. Why must we all be forced to become like the middle east countries with no freedoms and no tolerance for others whether it be religion or nationality.
We must defend who we are– and stop apologizing to those who come in, who are welcomed, but refuse to assimilate and respect us or appreciate all that we offer. We are not the Middle East, we are freedom. Do not give it up. Does not Mr. Geert Wilders have a COURAGEOUS AND VALID point???? That we are giving up our country, our heritage, our freedom, so easily? WHY ARE WE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE WRONG THINGS THAT THREATEN OUR FREEDOMS, BUT THE ENEMIES OF OUR COUNTRY HAVE THE RIGHT????? ISN’T SOMETHING VERY WRONG??? Why do the natural citizens of the western countries like the Netherlands, USA, Britain, etc. not have the respect of our own governments??? Why do we allow CAIR, HAMAS, etc. to manipulate and try to change who we are. Have they(the Middle East countries) been willing to change who they are and allow freedom of different religions, immigration— to allow us the same rights in their countries, the same respect?? etc. NO WAY!!! There will be no WEST with FREEDOM, if we so easily relinquish it to our enemies. If they come into our nations and refuse to assimilate or follow our laws, then they must be deported since they have a foreign agenda. We MUST VALUE OUR FREEDOM!! DON’T WAIT UNTIL IT IS TOO LATE. WAKE UP EUROPE!!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
It is happening in Australia too. A council in Victoria has decreed that people using the council swimming pool should dress in such a way that does not offend Muslims. Muslims however can offend us any time they want. Some malls have banned Christmas Carols for fear of offending Muslims.
Bugger them I say and if they don’t like our rules bugger off back to whatever hole in the ground they come from.
The Dutch need to force judge Schalken’s immediate resignation. They then need to get him banned from the practice of law for life. They then need to criminally prosecute him.
Next, they need to vigorously look into the other members of their judiciary who attend these “dinner parties”, which are obviously left-liberal planning and strategy sessions, that have co-opted some judges and lawyers.
“Next, they need to vigorously look into the other members of their judiciary who attend these “dinner parties”, which are obviously left-liberal planning and strategy sessions”
Just think of it as a “journolist” for judges.
Remember that Wilders is a political figure and this is a political trial. His move is a political attack on a corrupt judiciary.
His party will go on to help re-structure Holland’s system of justice now that the voters have seen the seamy side.
Good news from the Netherlands!
BTW: There’s a similiar freedom of speech trial going on in Austria:
Elisabeth’s Voice: An Appeal to the American Blogosphere
http://english.savefreespeech.org/
“Bertus once explained to me that he didn’t care that much for the Palestinian problem. It was more, he explained to me since I am a ‘bourgeois element of a passed generation’ that the Palestinian fate could expose the global structures of exploitation.”
I think he does not know why he is a Western left-wing anti-semite, and cannot believe he is a racist, so he makes up some Marxy-sounding gobbledy-gook to explain why he is obsessed the Israelis. It is because he is of the generation infected with the Soviet anti-zionist campaign. He hated Israel circa 1967 because Communist discourse decided that was the pravda to follow.
How far Holland has sunken, since the times when they resisted the “baddies” and helped a little girl, called Anne Frank, suriving just a little longer!
This once gutsy and proud society (like many Western societies, including Australia) is being undermined from without (by Islamists and their sympathisers, like Obama) and from within (by their own Judiciary, the left and their assorted media).
Who needs to be afraid of the advancing Islamisation and Sharia, when our Judiciary itself is killing the West.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/NetherlandsAmericanCemetery3.jpg
[ This is a photo of the Netherlands American Cemetery in Margraten. Almost ten thousand U.S. Servicemen are remembered there helping to return freedom to the Dutch in WWII. ]
Rita, the Dutch have been resisting the ‘baddies’ for a long time. Long Before the German Occupation the Dutch were under occupation by the Hapsburgs. They rebelled against the Spanish superpower and liberated their nation against more dire odds than today.
The Dutch sheltered the Pilgrims from the Brittish Crown for years before they went on to land on Plymouth Rock. The Dutch at Sint Eustatius were the first foreign power to recognise American Independence in Nov 16, 1776 – pissing off the Brittish in the process.
Geert is just the latest Dutchman through the ages at his best when giving a two-finger salute to the biggest bully in the schoolyard.
That judge sounds like a joke, and a bad one. It’s hard to believe that adult people in the 21st century think like that. His mind is restricted by his own words.
anyone know who pays the bills in the dutch system? winning is one thing. being bankrupted while winning kind of takes some of the glow away.
in crimninal cases, like in the US, you pay your own lawyer or accept one providing services for free if you can’t afford one.
in criminal cases, the cost of the court itself is paid by taxes.
in civil cases, either each party pays its own lawyers and shares the court cost, or the loosing party can be forced to pay everything (up to the complaint and the court to decide).
This is a criminal case.
There is also a parallel civil lawsuit brought by the people who originally filed charges against mr. Wilders with the police, some muhammedan groups with leftist financial support.
When fantasy Jewish Rabbis meet in a make-believe forest to plan the takeover of the world as in The Learned Elders of Zion myth their meeting is called a cabal. What do you call a a real-life secret conclave of anti-Semites scheming against Jews and Israel?
Wannsee.
Let me guess! JOURNOLIST?
Is this our future?