Verdict of judge on release of secret MH17 documents again delayed for a month!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Dutch government refused to release information about MH17 to the press. A lot of text which was released was  made unreable. Dutch newsstations NOS, RTL and Dutch newspaper Volkskrant went to court in February to force the Dutch Government to release the information based on the WOB (kind of Freedom on Information act) law.

The judge in February stated the verdict would be  end of March.

However the verdict was delayed for about six weeks till about end of April.

RTL received at May 3 a letter from the Utrecht court of justice stating the verdict will again be delayed. At the latest June 3 2016 the court will make  the verdict public.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

5 Comments on Verdict of judge on release of secret MH17 documents again delayed for a month!

  1. Liane Theuer // May 11, 2016 at 9:29 am // Reply

    No surprise. So time passes.
    In memory only remains the conviction of Russia by Bellingcat, BBC and others…
    Even if a whistleblower would come up, he would be silenced and the media would not dare to pay attention to him.

  2. Well, this is all about the handling of the Dutch government of the assault on the MH17. Their attitude for finding the truth cannot be illustrated worse.

    We must distinguish between the mismanagement of the Dutch government, which always get away in their fake-parliament, and scientific research into the cause of this war crime. We are only interested in the latter.

    This blog has cleaned the scene remarkably. We know warhead 9N314M is confirmed nor falsified. We know 9N314 and Bellingcat are falsified. For we do not accept warhead 9N314M on the old BUK-missile 9M38. Also we know 9N318 is falsified.

    We know we must search for much smaller warheads. Also we know bowties are partly falsified and partly disconfirmed.

    But above all we know JIT has no case because of our painstaking research to get them down.

  3. Let’s suppose the person/institution that paid 17Mio for the information which state/organisation suppressed or covered up evidence
    about who was responsible for MH17, got what he asked for. In this case
    I believe, this knowledge will not be used publicly but off stage according to opportuneness.

    • Liane Theuer // May 11, 2016 at 3:19 pm // Reply

      venice, if the knowledge of Josef Resch and his client would be used off stage, then the JIT has to come out with a different story then the DSB.
      I am curious if this will happen.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*