.
ER Editor: Monday’s press conference can be found in this Youtube video with English voiceover. Alas, it makes for painful listening due to the sound quality. Below that, Sasha Latypova republishes a Dutch report on the press conference.
LINK
********
Report from the NL about yesterday’s press conference in the case v. the Dutch state officials, Albert Bourla, Bill Gates and others alleging genocide
This is a repost of an article in Dutch, using AI translation.
Please consider supporting this case by donating to the Foundation Recht Oprecht. This post is a quick update, more information to follow. I made an English translation from this post in Dutch:
Press Conference of Stichting Recht Oprecht: New Evidence in the Lawsuit Against the State About COVID-19 Vaccinations
(Original Dutch Substack by Robin de Boer, Dec 16, 2025 — translated into English)
A press conference was held at the court in Leeuwarden by Stichting Recht Oprecht. The reason for the event was the ongoing civil lawsuit that the foundation is facilitating on behalf of seven individuals — now six, because one has died — who claim to have suffered serious health damage after COVID-19 vaccination. According to their lawyer, Mr. Peter Stassen, new and crucial evidence has recently been submitted that strikes at the core of the case.
New Evidence in Two Legal Procedures
Mr. Stassen explained that the new evidence was formally presented on December 7 to both the Court in Leeuwarden, where the main procedure is ongoing, and to the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam, where an appeal has been filed. The material consists of video messages and written reports from five international experts, supported by hundreds of source references. These submissions are meant to show that the plaintiffs were insufficiently and incorrectly informed before they chose to get vaccinated. Stassen argues that this amounts to systemic misleading — and that if they had been fully informed, the plaintiffs would have decided differently. That alleged deception forms the basis for a claim of unlawful conduct (“onrechtmatige daad”) against the State and other defendants.
Expert Conclusions Presented in the Evidence
Mr. Stassen presented what the expert material concludes. According to him:
- The COVID-19 injections cannot be regarded as regular vaccines, but were used as emergency measures with a military context.
- Because of that, they were used outside normal pharmaceutical law and consumer protections.
- The experts argue that the injections offer no health benefit, are not safe or effective, and cause serious side effects — allegedly foreseeable at the time of their design.
- Stassen links these conclusions to what he calls a broader “COVID-19 reset” or “Great Reset,” where vaccination plays a central role.
Criticism of Opposing Parties
Stassen sharply criticized the position of the opposing parties, including the Dutch State and several prominent government and health officials as well as pharmaceutical leaders. He noted that they refuse to engage substantively with the expert reports and oppose having the experts heard in court. He claimed that only Bill Gates formally responded to the judge, but without substantive rebuttal to the request to hear the experts.
Next Steps in the Legal Case
Concerning how the lawsuits will proceed, Stassen indicated that the Leeuwarden court plans a hearing between March and October 2026. In the appeal, the question remains whether the experts will ultimately be heard by the judges. Stassen emphasized that the new evidence now submitted makes a substantive legal debate unavoidable.
Support and Media Criticism
After the press conference, supporters of the plaintiffs were interviewed. A former general practitioner, Berber Pieksma, expressed support for Stassen and the foundation, and criticized mainstream media for largely ignoring the case. She claimed this was due to psychological barriers in accepting that the injections were harmful, despite widespread vaccination.
Role of the Foundation
Abe Dijkstra, Chairman of Stichting Recht Oprecht, explained that the foundation facilitates and funds the lawsuit. He stressed that legal costs are high, and that the campaign is funded entirely by donations. He framed the case as a struggle between a small group of citizens and a powerful government, with a large imbalance in resources.
Call to Follow the Case
The event concluded with an appeal to the public to continue following the case, to share information, and to financially support the foundation. Organizers stressed that the lawsuit is not only about seeking compensation for individuals but also about enabling what they describe as broader truth-finding and preventing similar situations in the future.
Source
*************
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply