This is refreshing: for the first time an article in the enemedia that doesn’t use smearwords like ‘right wing extremist populist racist’ and all the other derogatory epithets of the far left smear machine:
NIS News, AMSTERDAM, 16/04/11 – MP Geert Wilders’ defence asked the district court in Amsterdam on Friday to prosecute Islam expert Bertus Hendriks for perjury. When the court refused this demand, the defence asked for the judges to be replaced.
Bram Moszkowicz, Wilders’ lawyer, wanted an investigation of perjury launched against Hendriks. The lawyer stated that Hendriks made a statement as witness in the case on Friday morning that was in conflict with an earlier commentary that he gave in De Pers newspaper on the now notorious ‘dinner’ on 3 May 2010. (Continued below the fold)
The Marxist Muslim Convergence
All parties fiercely rejected the proposal which they branded as discriminatory because the Freedom Party is not opposed to the construction of new places of worship of other religions.
The local party Islam Democrats said it felt discriminated against and the Hague City Party (HSP) spoke of a “provocation, pure and simple.” (more)
Wilders trial, continued:
A dinner club met on 3 May last year, of which Hendriks was a member. Fellow Islam expert Hans Jansen was also invited to it. Jansen already appeared on Thursday as a court witness and stated that Judge Tom Schalken tried to convince him at the dinner table that Wilders must be convicted.
Hendriks was the person who invited Jansen to the dinner. “That he was an expert witness in the case seemed interesting to us,” Hendriks said earlier in De Pers. But on Friday, he said in the court that there was no connection whatever with the Wilders case.
Hendriks thereby committed perjury, said Moszkowicz. But the court rejected this request to launch an investigation. The lawyer then asked for the judges to be replaced for alleged bias.
Moszkowicz earlier already requested for new judges twice. He failed once but got his way the second time. It was still unclear on Friday evening whether the new request would be honoured.
Hendriks acknowledged Friday that the dinner club, which has been meeting for eight years, only invited a guest for the second time ever. The idea was to talk with Jansen on Islam in general and not about the Wilders case, he stated. Nonetheless, judge Schalken had a briefcase with him containing the verdict in which he had ordered the OM to prosecute Wilders for incitement to hatred and discrimination.
But according to Hendriks, Jansen himself started talking about the Wilders case. Jansen termed the proceedings against the MP a “witch-hunt”. On this, Schalken gave his opposing views, said Hendriks, who concluded all in all that there was no question of the judge trying to influence Jansen regarding a hearing on 6 May 2010, three days after the dinner.