“The contact with probation and the Public prosecution service (OM), I experience as extremely unsafe.”
It accuses Van der Graaf is not constructive in the talks with the probation. The ORDER requires that Van der Graaf for a year, the cell enters for violating the terms of his temporary release
“Reclassering Nederland has promised that the calls are safe and the reports are never to the TO delivered would be. Then there were suddenly pictures of the calls made, then to the TO went”, says Van der Graaf in a written by him, ten edges long statement.
Van der Graaf described in detail why he considers to be or to cooperate. “And yet it is the claim of the ORDER to you again for a year in jail, what went wrong do you think”, asked the court to Van der Graaf. “They are looking for a stick to beat them with. They want me to stumble”, he replied firmly.
Declaration
During the handling of the case turns out on Monday that since mid-2015, virtually every conversation with the probation started with a Van der Graaf read aloud a declaration in which he reported no use in the conversation.
“It’s TO see a pattern of it to give an answer, but not to the question of giving standard answers, the dodging of questions; of the not actively participate in the supervision; of the contest the relevance of the questions and of his obligations; of provoking discussions that are the focus of the content of the supervision to infer,” said the officer of justice.
“Van der Graaf from probation to gain insight into his person and deprives of probation and ORDER and thus the society the opportunity to determine whether he or she in the future again in the might go wrong. That is the reproach TO him, and that is the reason that his release should be revoked.”
Closed doors
The case against Van der Graaf will partly behind closed doors to be treated. The lawyer of Van der Graaf, Willem Jebbink, asked the court Monday morning to hear the transcripts of the interviews with the probation not in the public place to find. According to Jebbink the privacy of his client harmed because everything outside is brought in via Twitter.
the discussions with The probation would be very detailed. The court also finds that the literal view of the discussions with the probation are confidential. The reports from these discussions may arise or be publicly discussed.
Personal information
Jebbink says that the creation and saving of conversations between Van der Graaf and rehabilitation in conflict with the personal law. Probation would, according to the lawyer promised that gespreksaantekeningen not in the file might end up.
The officer of justice reacted in court by stating that it is a rare situation would be if the court and the Public Ministry no use would be allowed to make the information of the probation. The record of the talks would be a decision of the probation.
terms and Conditions
Van der Graaf came in may 2014 subject to the terms and conditions free. He had two-thirds of his sentence of eighteen years imprisonment served and was released with a number of special conditions, such as a contactverbod with the next of kin, a mediaverbod and reporting to and supervision by the probation.
Van der Graaf protested against the conditions and went in appeal against mandatory counselling by a psychologist. In september he was upheld by the appeal court in The Hague.
The court ruled that Van der Graaf should continue to contribute to the evaluation of the conditions imposed. Also he must continue to regularly report to the probation to give information and answer questions about his situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment