UPDATE 24 FEBRUARY 2026: Watt has recorded an instructive presentation that provides an overview of the case and case materials: https://rumble.com/v767nu8-leeuwarden-nl-litigation-presentation-by-katherine-watt.html
Those following the civil tort case in Leeuwarden, Netherlands, may be interested in the Memo in Support of Petitioners’ Appeal that American paralegal Katherine Watt submitted yesterday. She has posted it on the Bailiwick News WordPress site, on the page containing her full archive of materials related to the case.
Per Watt:
“The nominated witnesses are permitted to attend and observe the hearing. The Amsterdam Court of Appeal is not expected to offer nominated witnesses the opportunity to testify on substantive matters on March 9, 2026. The subject of the hearing is whether the court of appeals should allow petitioners’ appeal to proceed under one or more exceptions to a rule that otherwise bars appeal of the Aug. 20, 2025 lower court decision. Defendants have objected to the court of appeals hearing the appeal.”
I am familiar, via Bailiwick News, with the basics of the case but am not qualified to comment on its merits and therefore direct readers to Watt’s documentation for the most accurate information about her perspective on the case.
What I most appreciate about Watt’s memo is the language she uses to characterize what she views as the deceptive structure of U.S. law with respect to alleged communicable disease and attempts to “control” its “spread” or “threat.”
One way of summarizing the essence of what Watt conveys in her memo is as follows:
- The defendants can lie, and the law not only permits it but protects it.
- This means that the defendants are under no obligation to tell the truth, no requirement to meet a truth standard, no burden of proof, and no evidentiary threshold.
- They are, in effect, legally authorized to present false, fabricated, or misleading claims, and may rely on information prepared by others without verifying its accuracy.
- The very structure of the law does not constrain deception; it accommodates it.
Two paragraphs on page 6 directed toward the defendants stand out:
Defendants have attributed the causation of observed, symptomatic respiratory illnesses (colds and flus) and deaths of living human beings to a sole cause: the presumed (without verification) agency of a hypothesized unique, stable, disease-causing (sole-cause), transmissible or contagious “pathogen.”
In the “SARS,” “SARS-CoV-2,” and “Covid disease” contexts, specific devices used by defendants to equate correlation with causation, exclude attribution to other causes, and falsify or fabricate evidence of severe or deadly disease threats to human health include computer-generated gene sequences, RT-PCR test kits, serum antibody test kits, and government online “dashboards” depicting positive test results, infections, and changes over time.
Based on everything I have been able to read about events, scientific findings, and medical literature related to the COVID-19 operation, these statements also apply to hundreds, if not thousands, of officials, authority figures, researchers, agencies, organizations, and private individuals.
Along those lines, attorney Peter Stassen has pointed out that plaintiffs in any country can file similar civil tort claims in their own countries, using the core arguments and international-organization evidence (NATO, WEF) that the Dutch case assembled, and tracking down the other country’s defendants and the other country’s version of the Netherlands evidence. During a 15 December 2025 press conference, Stassen said:
“But perhaps even more important: anyone can conduct a proceeding like this in the Netherlands or elsewhere in the world. The publication of all procedural documents on the website of the Recht Oprecht Foundation is a helping hand for all lawyers and clients who want to stand up against the suppression of the truth. Anyone may take note of those documents and use them for his or her own proceeding, so that more and more can be done against the suppression of the truth.”
Leave a Reply