Text of the Court’s Decision

Geert Wilders as Galileo

Below is the text of the Amsterdam court’s decision (from the court website), as translated by VH:

Decisions directional session Wilders

Amsterdam, February 3, 2010 — In the criminal case against Wilders at the request of the defense three experts on the Islam and the Quran will be heard by the examining magistrate. The application of the Public Ministry that Wilders be heard by the examining magistrate is rejected. The handling of the content of the case will take place later this year.

At the directional meeting on January 20 the counsel of Geert Wilders presented a preliminary defense and put in place research demands.

The court has first determined that the Amsterdam Court has jurisdiction to handle the Wilders trial and that Wilders may be prosecuted.

The court has commissioned the examining magistrate to hear three experts in the field of Islam and the Koran. These experts are Mr. J.J.G. Jansen, Mr. S.R. Admiraal and Mrs. W. Sultan. The request to hear so-called experience experts in the field of Islam is rejected. According to the court the defense has made not made sufficiently clear what they might add to the trial. The court will also not hear the suggested legal experts, because the defense has enough additional options to present its legal views to the court.

– – – – – – – –

The Public Prosecutor has requested that Wilders be heard by an examining magistrate. That request was rejected partly because Wilders will be questioned later in public in court.

The case is referred to the investigating magistrate to hear the three experts on Islam. At this time, it cannot yet be determined when the experts can be heard. The case is therefore postponed for an indefinite time. At a later time the court will determine the dates for the content handling.

LJ Number

Hat tip: Paul Belien.

2 thoughts on “Text of the Court’s Decision

  1. What is telling from the text of the court’s decision on expert witnesses, is the fact that the three allowed witnesses appear to be deliberately demoted without their titles as Doctors. Is it laziness on the part of the court’s scribes? I think not.

Comments are closed.