Dutch human rights activist, Olax Outis had no “lawful defence” and was stopped from give a closing speech – but was acquitted by the jury in a verdict seen as a snub to a system complicit in Genocide.
I don’t think you’re really engaging with this… do you think there should be no limits on what evidence and testimony is admitted, just because it’s inside the court? Why even have the judge in there?
I don’t think you’re really engaging with this… do you think there should be no limits on what evidence and testimony is admitted, just because it’s inside the court? Why even have the judge in there?