Three COVID-19 vaccine injury victims are asking to join a Dutch lawsuit against Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and 15 other defendants, alleging they misled the public about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines.
The lawsuit was filed last year by seven COVID-19 vaccine injury victims, one of whom has since died.
According to a filing by the plaintiffs’ attorney, Peter Stassen, the three new victims “were healthy people” who began experiencing health problems after receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
“The applicants are of the opinion that the serious side effects that occurred after having the Covid-19 (mRNA) injections are the direct result of the content / composition of these Covid-19 (mRNA) injections,” the filing states.
Doctors have repeatedly refused to diagnose a link between vaccination and their injuries, Stassen said.
During a hearing today at the District Court of North Netherlands in Leeuwarden, Stassen also asked the court to approve five expert witnesses who will testify about the risks and dangers of the COVID-19 shots:
- Catherine Austin Fitts, founder and publisher of the Solari Report and former U.S. assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
- Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical research and development executive.
- Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., a psychotherapist who is litigating to prohibit mRNA vaccines in Florida.
- Katherine Watt, a researcher and paralegal.
- Mike Yeadon, Ph.D., a pharmacologist and former vice-president of Pfizer’s allergy and respiratory research unit.
Another proposed witness, Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., who agreed in January to testify on behalf of the plaintiffs, has since died. Boyle was a professor of international law at the University of Illinois and a bioweapons expert who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989.
According to Dutch newspaper De Andere Krant, eight attorneys attended today’s hearing on behalf of the defendants, who also include the Dutch state, former Dutch prime minister and current NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and several members of the Dutch government’s pandemic-era Outbreak Management Team.
Gates is a prominent investor in mRNA vaccine technology who invested in BioNTech, a German pharmaceutical company that partnered with Pfizer to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Gates later sold his BioNTech shares at a significant profit.
The defendants’ lawyers argued that the court should not allow the proposed witnesses to testify. The lawyers questioned the expertise and impartiality of the proposed witnesses and argued that the “general scientific consensus” is that the COVID-19 vaccines are “safe and effective.”
“Scientific consensus? What is that, anyway?” Stassen asked the court, accusing the defense of using “false ad hominem arguments to undermine the expertise of his witnesses.”
Dutch journalist Ido Dijkstra, who attended the hearing, said the defendant’s arguments “ignored the obvious damage the vaccines made” — doing so in the presence of several of the vaccine injury victims who filed the lawsuit and were at the hearing.
Dijkstra said none of the plaintiffs spoke during the hearing.
Last year, attorneys for Gates sought dismissal of the lawsuit, claiming the court lacked jurisdiction.
However, in its Oct. 16, 2024, ruling, the court said it has jurisdiction over Gates, finding “sufficient evidence” that the claims against Gates and the other defendants are “connected” and based on the same “complex of facts.”
Mass COVID vaccination program ‘an unprecedented crime,’ plaintiffs argue
During the hearing, Stassen called the COVID-19 mass vaccination program “the greatest genocide of humanity ever” and “an unprecedented crime accompanied by coercion, deception, and even murder,” De Andere Krant reported.
Stassen said that if the court refused to allow the proposed expert witnesses to testify, it would mean “this court doesn’t want to know the truth.”
Stassen said:
“If you, as a judge, reject our request to hear these witnesses, which I doubt you will, then the blood already on the defendants’ hands will soon be on yours as well. This case must become a public debate that can only be resolved in court. Politics has already proven that it cannot do that.”
According to Dutch journalist Erica Krikke, who attended the hearing, attorneys for the defense did not speak much and largely refrained from commenting on Stassen’s statements.
Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst, who also attended the hearing, said Stassen “did quite well” in countering the defendants’ arguments. Terhorst noted that the defense attorneys included some of the Netherlands’ most prominent legal figures.
She also said she believes the court will allow the expert witnesses to testify.
“The law provides that the hearing of experts needs to be accepted, unless abuse of this legal right can be proven. In my view, because the argument of abuse was not made and also not proven, the court will have to allow the hearing to take place,” Terhorst said.
