Citaat | Rechtbank Den Haag 11 september 2019

Onder 3.3 Rechtbank Den Haag 11 september 2019

Een alinea uit Rechtbank Den Haag 11 september 2019, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:10650.

Regarding the prohibition of arbitrariness the rule applies that the fact that third parties are not prosecuted for actions that should be the object of criminal proceedings as much as the actions of the accused, does not necessarily lead to the inadmissibility of the criminal prosecution of the accused. It should be examined if the Prosecution Service arbitrarily prosecutes one suspect and not the other suspect although these suspects are in a similar position. Against this background the lawyer has insufficiently sustained that other physicians, in cases similar to that of the accused, have acted without due care. The lawyer has not mentioned any specific case, besides the reference to the “applesauce case”. But also regarding the “applesauce case” the lawyer has failed to provide any specific circumstances of that case or indicated why this is comparable to the case of the accused. It is the opinion of the court that the lawyer has not made a plausible case that the prosecution of the accused would be contrary to the prohibition of arbitrariness.

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/d2ceeb246b82b390e688b0c010cf8d30fc0d854334e03015e3e092670504e1df. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt d2ceeb246b82b390e688b0c010cf8d30fc0d854334e03015e3e092670504e1df, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 11932 tot 13018.