02/08

02/08/10

There was a preliminary hearing in the Fortuyn murder case yesterday, and it was broadcast live on TV. I saw most of it.

The main evidence as presented by the proscecution was:

several witnesses saw Van der G. (as he's called in the media here for privacy reasons) shoot Fortuyn and he was pursued until his arrest within minutes after the murder;
a gun that beyond reasonable doubt was the murder weapon was found in Van der G.'s possession;
ammunition consistent with the ammunition used at the shooting was found at Van der G.'s home;
traces of Fortuyn's blood and tissue were found on the gun and on Van der G.'s clothing;
gunpowder traces were found on Van der G.'s gloves and other clothing, consistent with him having fired the gun;
a map of the location where Fortuyn was killed was found in Van der G.'s car, which was parked near the site of the murder;
information found on Van der G.'s computer showed that he had been researching Fortuyn extensively before the murder.

Some new evidence that the proscecution presented:

on the gun DNA traces were found that belonged to a victim of a murder committed in late 2001. In all probability the gun wasn't used to commit this murder;
at Van der G.'s home ingredients were found that could be used to make a bomb.

Even when this seems to be an open-and-shut case, the proscecution are taking their time to investigate from every possible angle, especially any accomplices that Van der G. might have had, to prevent JFK-like conspiracy theories from popping up.

If I understand correctly, the defense's argument could be summed up as "Van der G. has been declared guilty already, by high-ranking politicians and others, and this is a violation of his human rights. The defense asked the judges to call a large number of witnesses, former prime minister Wim Kok, current prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende and four cabinet ministers among them. The judges reasoned that only parties actually involved in the investigation could have an undue political influence on the proceedings, and refused to call the two prime ministers and the four cabinet ministers, though they agreed to call a number of the other witnesses.

With the camera surveillance the justice department seems to be shooting itself in the foot. Initially the lights in Van der G.'s cell were on constantly, but after protests that this constituted torture this was changed to surveillance with infra-red cameras. Van der G.still considered this a breach of his privacy and went on hunger strike four weeks ago. This means that the camera surveillance, intended to prevent suicide, may eventually have the opposite effect.

Van der G. has signed a statement that when he goes into coma, which might happen in two weeks or so if he continues his hunger strike, he does not wish to be force-fed. There is debate about whether it's legally possible to force-feed in spite of the statement, and whether there will be any doctor willing to do so.
BBC: Fortuyn murder hearing opens

More Dutch politics and current events:
Dutch politics in 2002

With the exceptions listed here, all content © 2002-2004 D9D1E2.COM. Please read the disclaimer, copyright information and terms of use. On this page Transitional HTML 4.01 and CSS 1 are used. If you're seeing this text you either have CSS switched off in your browser, or you're using a browser that can't handle CSS. If you're using an older browser version, you might want to consider upgrading.