The Wilders Trial: Day 1

Free Geert banner

Geert Wilders’ trial on “hate speech” charges was adjourned last spring, and has now reconvened in the courtroom in Amsterdam. A postponement has become a possibility, if a judge must be replaced for making a statement containing bias, as Mr. Wilders’ lawyer has asserted.

Klein Verzet has a report on the first day of the new proceedings against Mr. Wilders:

Today, it was the 1st real trial day in the prosecution against Geert Wilders and his opinions. The event is broadcasted live on Dutch state television and it’s quite a story:

The first amazing thing was that the court wanted to show Fitna in court. That means that for the first time, Fitna will be broadcasted on Dutch national television.

Second surprise was that at the start of the trial, Wilders his lawyer, unexpectedly stated that Wilders would use his right not to answer any questions during his trial, as he as his lawyer had advised him to do so.

His lawyer also asked the court to allow mister Wilders to make a small 2 minute statement in order for him to explain this decision. During the short statement Wilders defended free speech and declared that he has said what he has said and does not take anything back from it. Also he added that he can’t guarantee that anything that is attributed to him is also actually said by him.

The president of the court Jan Moorse then wanted to debate Wilders his decision, but again Wilders repeated that he wouldn’t not answer any questions in court. Then judge Jan Moorse amazingly did not accept his statement in which he took his right not to answer the court and even allowed himself to make a value judgment about it.

Read the rest at Klein Verzet.

A slightly different take on the day’s events may be found in the Grauniad.

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

10 thoughts on “The Wilders Trial: Day 1

  1. Wow. This is quite insane.

    From the short movie, it seems that Wilders is quite emotional about this. At least at the beginning of the hearing. Which is normal, taking in consideration that he has to support this abuse. I guess the plan of the judge was to provoke a angry outburst from Geert, which would qualify him as a mad men and end his carrier. But they failed. They are bluffing.
    If they condemn Geert, it will become a symbol and the entire justice system from Holland will be tainted with this filth forever. They put the spotlight on Geert, hoping that he will make a mistake, but I think they picked on the wrong man. Using the right not to speak, it’s simply a stroke of genius. Probably the judges are furious about this, but they must follow their orders. A real eye-opener for what it’s really happening in Europe.

  2. Eye witness from Holland. A friend of mine sent me this:

    “The proces with Wilders is hilarious and funny. They are broadcasting it live on Dutch Television and I followed it today. Wilders’ advocate is super (Bram Moskovic). Can you follow the news about it in Denmark?

    At this moment the trail is interrupted till tomorrow 2 p.m. because Geert and Bram objected that the judge and the Amsterdam courthouse is biased. Geert Wilders got the advice from his advocate to use the law to remain silent today. They based the objection on a sentence from the judge. The judge said that he read papers and watcheds television (who doesn’t hihi) and that others say that after statements, Wilders does not go in discussion and, as he said to Wilders, you seem to do that now again. Bram and Geert asked for a retaliotion (in terms of law) because the judge made the pretext that he is not reliable. G en B said this statement is not objective and comes from the judge himselve and from the courthouse (the other judges from the courthouse agreed with the judge his sentence) wich made them biased.

    Bram and Geert also seem so have fun once and a while during the court 🙂


  3. That this can happen at all in a so called democracy is a travesty.

    It’s highly reminiscent of Stalin’s show trials.

    If he said something that untoward the people should reject him. Not some court who are set up to uphold socialist ideals.

    Geert Akhbar!

  4. K’thardin: Should I be reminded as much of the trial of Hank Reardon in Atlas Shrugged as I am right this very moment?

    If not that of Reardon, most certainly “The Trial“, by Kafka as skillfully rendered by Orson Welles.

    Anyone who has not seen this masterpiece really should consider doing so. Anthony Perkins turns in an Oscar-worthy performance as the protagonist and Welles is perfect as a sleazy lawyer.

    The film’s tone and entire appearance is superb even if the intentional lack of plot resolution is almost migraine-inducing in its frustrating, muddlesome and glacial progress.

  5. If the court views the film fitna,will they not be as allegedly guilty as geert?This is the same as the holohoax trials in Germany,but those poor devils are entirely abandoned by the voice of europe so to speak,geerts “trial” is the same perversion of established justice that is prevalent throughout western europe,and the people have allowed this disgrace for far too long,arise europe and take back what belongs to you,your WILL!

  6. Bloomberg: Dutch Court Rejects Wilders Push to Change Judges at Muslim-Insult Trial
    The Amsterdam district court rejected a request by Freedom Party Leader Geert Wilders, who is on trial for inciting hatred and insulting Muslims, to replace the judges hearing his case because they may be prejudiced.

    “There are no weighty indications that the judges have given the impression of being prejudiced,” Judge Frans Bauduin, who was brought in to rule on the impartiality question, said at the court today. The trial, which was halted yesterday, will continue with the current judges tomorrow at 9 a.m. local time.
    Presiding Judge Jan Moors yesterday, on the first day of the trial, told Wilders the court “reads newspapers and watches television” and that Wilders has been blamed by others for being “good in taking a stand and then avoiding a discussion.” By choosing not to testify “it seems you’re doing that today as well.”

    Wilders, who has agreed to support the country’s new minority government, challenged the impartiality of the three- judge panel because of what Moors said, claiming “a fair trial isn’t possible anymore.”

    “The words used by the presiding judge in that last sentence were chosen unfortunately,” Bauduin said. “They’ve given the requestor a wrong impression.”
    Wilders, 47, is being prosecuted after complaints following a 2007 Dutch newspaper editorial he wrote that called the Koran “fascist” and compared it to Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf. A year later, he released the movie “Fitna,” in which he calls on Muslims to rip out “hate-preaching” verses from the book.

Comments are closed.