Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.
Do not rejoice over me, my enemy; When I fall, I will arise; When I sit in darkness, the Lord will be a light to me.
From the very beginning of this case, all the way to this point, the Municipality of Dordrecht has deliberately covered themselves in silence and in mystery, refusing to share what all of this is really about. Not only did they refused to talk to us, they also refused to talk to our lawyer for a long time. When the court case finally took place, we noticed that the court gave the most weight to the authenticity of my emails and the (non) compliance with the legal notification requirement. As I mentioned before, the judge ignored substantial evidence and ruled against us based on the assumptions of the Municipality of Dordrecht, saying that I had falsified the emails. Therefore I had not complied with the legal notification requirement, because of which we were labeled as frauds.
The children of Israel were oppressed, along with the children of Judah; All who took them captive have held them fast; They have refused to let them go. Their Redeemer is strong; The Lord of hosts is His name. He will thoroughly plead their case, that He may give rest to the land, and disquiet the inhabitants of Babylon.
He gives power to the weak, and to those who have no might He increases strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall, but those who wait on the Lord shall renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint.
Since I knew that all emails are real indeed, and since I have nothing to hide and no longer anything to lose, I decided to look around for IT professionals who could help me to proof the authenticity of the emails. Then someone pointed my attention to the fact that all such information is legally required to be in the files of the Municipality of Dordrecht. Therefore, all my emails must be retrievable through a WOB request (Open Government Act).
The first action we took was doing a WOB request for all the Message Tracking Logs of the mail server of the Municipality of Dordrecht, which they are legally required to keep for at least 5 to 10 years. The response came fairly quick. They had erased all the log files. Against this response we started a new lawsuit.
The second action we took was doing a WOB request for all the emails they claimed never to have received. Since those emails are genuine, they have a legal obligation to keep and archive them for at least 5 to 10 years after the end of all litigation. That litigation is still not finished. That is why those emails must be legally retrievable through a WOB request. In response to this we suddenly received an invitation from the Municipality of Dordrecht. They wanted to meet with us, yet they refused to tell us why. The only thing they told us was that new information had come to light. Although reluctantly, we decided to accept.
During this meeting they did everything they could to try to confuse us, in which they didn’t succeed. They told us that they only save all files and documents for one year, which is a violation of the law and the ‘Selection list of municipalities and inter-municipal bodies’ (a legal document of the Association of Dutch Municipalities). Therefore, they claimed not to be able to produce the requested emails. None of the thirteen emails we had listed. However, they told us that they were able to ‘find’ three emails, of which they gave us a printed copy. Those three emails they ‘found’ were the ‘new information that had come to light’. Strangely enough those three emails were not on the list of requested emails, so they didn’t comply with this legal request. This means that they deliberately let us come to Dordrecht for nothing. It was all one big act in an attempt to frustrate us. But they didn’t realize that they still handed us something very valuable.
When we closely looked at the three emails they gave us, we noticed that all these emails were from the very same period as the ones we requested. They were even from the same mailbox. To be clear, those emails were older than one year. This showed us that they do not use a retention period of one year, but that they do this selectively, meaning that all important emails regarding to our cases were selectively deleted, while all other mails from the same period were kept. I will express myself cautiously, but that seems like an official crime, namely the misappropriation of evidence, which is a misdemeanor and punishable by law (Article 361, Criminal Law). Of this fact we will file a police report as well, against all people involved. In the end, their official response to our second WOB request was that they use a retention period of one year. For all files and dossiers. Again, this is a violation of the law. Against this response we started a new lawsuit as well.
Both new lawsuits have yet to appear in court. And they will. To be continued.