Thanks and a tip of the hat to Gates of Vienna for leading me to this nifty resource. Those of us who only know English won't get much out of the dialog from the reading of the expert testimony.From the transcript, it is clear that Prof. Jansen carefully laid out evidence from Islam's canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence. He delved into the science of abrogation, which probably had the audience bored stiff. The video clip, with a run time of 14:29 may bore you to tears but when the camera leaves the bench and scans the defense and prosecution tables, we can observe facial expressions and body language. At 4:35, it is clear that Jansen is having difficulty hearing the reading of his testimony. At 6:21 we get our first good look at the prosecution table and the spectators behind them. At 9:06, we get another good look at the prosecution table. Note the body language and expressions. Those are not happy campers. They are trying not to show it, but they have a weak hand and they know it. The cards of evidence are turning against their game. At 11:14, it becomes clear that the defense attorney is starting to lose his composure, poker face fatigue must be setting in. At 11:39 he turns away from the camera. Everybody seems tired bored, or frustrated. Observe the body language as they go on break about 13:21. The prosecution team is last to leave, and not stepping lively. Another post from Gates of Vienna has the first clue. The complainants are concerned that the prosecution undercharged Wilders. They want the charge elevated to inciting violence, citing an alleged quote from 2007: “a struggle going on and we must defend ourselves.” Yeah, right, that is incitement to violence. The absurdity of the accusation accentuates the arrogance of Islam. Jihad is waged with the tongue, pen, heart and purse as well as the sword. Likewise defense. The prosecutor turned them down.