Evidence vs Hear Say

ThePolice officer Bas Wijnen clearly stated in the complaint held against him for kidnapping the chilkdren that it was WilmaPittana who said to him that I had misteated and beaten my elderly mother and that I did not look after my children for two and a half years.Now after four years and a half the Pittana family now claims that they never said anything to this Police officer Bas Wijnen - https://www.bitchute.com/video/mr4P5Q4gVtsw/ .

And no family Pittana: Mavis-alicia do not have to proof anything. You will have to defend yourself to show and proof you never said anything to the Police and like you said here you never saw anything either. You have co conspired with the authorities for the last four years and a half. Mavis-alicia does not have to proof shit to any of you. You have kidnapped the children with the government by acquiesce and never replied to any affidavit of Facts sent to you and the Watch Tower Society / Jehova's getuigen organisation.
It is now between you and the Police officer - BAS WIJNEN I confronted everyone the Police choose to say you said and you are now after four years and a half and during these four years and a half you are complicit in the whole case by seeing my property [children] and refusing to react to the letters, affidavit and notice of default sent to you.

Everyone now who has worked in this case is co conspiritor to the kidnapping of the children.

Eventhough Hearsay is permissable inThe Netherlands this Police officer - BAS WIJNEN lied to save his own ass and is guilty of kidnapping of two boys under threat duress and coercion., with no due process under the color of law. Because Wilma Pittana admits to never has seen anything because she was not present in the house and never said anything to the Police officer.

This is now evidence Mavis-alicia's children were kidnapped with no court order under threat duress and coercion based on hear say under the color of law with no due process because Police tillthis day did nothing with all my police report filling against all Police officers who nbeat me up for asking full disclosure on my children - https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=kZn35RXZmStKx6q2f88Md5rRw830ObxxzqgX

Art 342 Sv- https://maxius.nl/wetboek-van-strafvordering/artikel342

Title VI. Handling of the case by the court
Third Section. Evidence
Article 342
1 A statement by a witness means his statement of facts or circumstances which he himself observed or experienced during the investigation at the trial.
2 The evidence that the accused has committed the charged offense cannot be assumed by the judge solely on the basis of the statement of one witness.

Titel VI. Behandeling van de zaak door de rechtbank
Derde afdeeling. Bewijs
Artikel 342
1.Onder verklaring van een getuige wordt verstaan zijne bij het onderzoek op de terechtzitting gedane mededeeling van feiten of omstandigheden, welke hij zelf waargenomen of ondervonden heeft.
2.Het bewijs dat de verdachte het telastegelegde feit heeft begaan, kan door den rechter niet uitsluitend worden aangenomen op de verklaring van één getuige.