Netherlands / 05-08-2012
Holocaust denier rejects the court’s authority
For the second time Jeroen de Kreek has been put on trial for his denial of the holocaust and for anti-Semitism. He spreads his interviews through his internet sites. The CIDI and the MDI have sued him for this. Claims were also filed by the Joodse Omroep (the Jewish broadcasting) as well as by the Member of the Lower House form the VVD party, Mrs. Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, and the expert on Arab affairs, Mr. Hans Jansen. As in the previous case, the former lawyer De Kreek, who enjoys publicity, rejected the authority of the court.
De Kreek, who is accused not only of antisemitism but also of hassling the former Prime Minister, Mr. Balkenende, objects to the court’s authority, and he asked the judge right away if his name was not by any chance “Cohen”. When this attempt failed, he continued to utilize delay techniques, such as submitting piles of documents, demanding to call a multitude of witnesses etc. The extended report may be read here. He screamed, yelled and insulted those who were present.
Although the suspect tried to do everything to disrupt the session, the District Attorney and the court staff remained serious and calm. The facts in the bill of indictment were not funny at all. There was extensive discussion of his antisemitic expressions. Beside that, a claim was filed regarding threats against the expert on Arab affairs, Mr. Hans Jansen, but this claim was dismissed by the court. As a matter of fact, the prosecutor decided that it had been proven that the suspect offended Mr. Hans Jansen and the Member of the Lower House form the VVD party, Mrs. Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, in a particularly rough and offensive manner.
The prosecutor demanded that two portable computers, two PCs and a hard disk de Kreek had used for his activities be confiscated, and he was sentenced to 100 hours of mandatory service jobs and to one month suspended imprisonment sentence for the period of three years.
De Kreek defended himself and made a fuss because he was not granted more time than was the prosecutor. As a result he rejected the authority of the court. That means that the judges must convene before the session can continue. The judges’ meeting is expected to take place soon.