Thijs H’s lawyer now also is a judge, appointed by the same justice dept. that brought charges against his client. Interesting publication on the law firm’s website, which essentially is a reiteration of the prosecutor’s case. https://t.co/Idoxyk4TJQ pic.twitter.com/Taii5vkSe2

— Eduard van Diemen (@eduardvandiemen) July 15, 2023

I was reading an article on Vara.nl in which the Brunssum PD asked the public “not to stand in our way with your nonsense”. An argument against misinformation online, which in fact sounds more like a (recurring) rant. No substantiation, no concrete examples, what is left between the lines is a heap of frustration.

It actually is a demand for faith and trust. The kind that is reminiscent of pre-internet days, rooted in the all encompassing oath; the police officer as the writer of the truth, and nothing but the truth. 

A position they still feel very much entitled to. In an environment where checks & balances are so unashamedly disregarded: total absence of body cams and dashcams, 112 calls remain undisclosed, interrogations unrecorded, just to name a few. 

As the landscape changed, however, and each individual became their own publisher, the public started to fill in the gaps. The range of attributes authorities wield at those who provide “unsolicited” input is remarkable, writer of nonsense being one of the milder ones. But if that input just so happens to be directly contradicting the oath, the spotlight is quickly redirected, at the authorities themselves.

In response to which the PDs start yelling, handing out fines and even paying home visits. That’s when you know the counterweight against this Policing On Good Faith approach is firmly in place. The angrier these officers get, you could say, the better it works.

also read:

tinyurl.com/4ahuedst

A few WhatsApp messages from the opposition said more than a thousand words. Cartoonist Oppenheimer encapsulated the sender in this image; the real Renske Leijten. tinyurl.com/yrt2ezj8

Listen how the Mayor of Haarlem, after receiving an apparent cue, personally phones up citizens with “mental problems” in order to have a little chat. Then, after a “sometimes difficult” consideration, he hands a verdict; the decision whether or not to have them institutionalized.

If he has doubts in particular cases and believes a person is completely sane and “another issue is at play”, he is staying on the safe side, and has him or her locked up anyway. Just to make sure that no bad individual slips through and the peace & quiet is preserved.

(KRO De Verwondering 23 okt 2022)