It looks like a lot of unheard of moves are done such as distorting the voices of the defendants' lawyers. I don't think I have ever heard of it, but perhaps Grok will know if this is the first time.
I hadn't heard of this either and asked Grok. It seems to be a novelty indeed, but the question is why? Grok says:
"Dutch legal practices, as outlined in the references, allow for recordings of conversations by participants under certain conditions (e.g., Section 139a of the Dutch Criminal Code), but these rules primarily apply to private recordings, not court-approved recordings of hearings. The references also indicate that Dutch courts have strict privacy and data protection regulations under the GDPR, which could influence how recordings are handled, but they
do not mention voice distortion in court settings as a standard or previously noted practice. The introduction of a new press guideline in the Netherlands, mentioned in the press release, restricting video recordings to "accredited journalists" and the court's decision to censor video recordings of the hearing,
further complicates transparency but does not directly address audio distortion precedents."
"Without specific prior examples in the Netherlands, it appears that this case may be an unusual or unique occurrence. The lack of explanation from the court and the absence of documented similar cases in the provided references
suggest this could be a novel situation. For definitive confirmation, further investigation into Dutch court records or legal commentary would be needed, which is not available in the current sources." I did ask Grok to access
all available sources to it.
I don't need to mention that there is no mention of this in the mainstream media at all. I looked up all defense lawyers mentioned in the court document, and all but one, who has his own firm, are working for two of the top Dutch law firms, and I can't really think of an explanation as to why their voices would be distorted
, very strange.
