Overview
- In day-two testimony, Edwin Renzen and Peter Noorlander acknowledged inserting incorrect claims in Stint user manuals.
- The manuals asserted conformity with the European Machinery Directive, a claim prosecutors say was untrue.
- The men also conceded a 2011 application to the infrastructure ministry wrongly suggested a completed CE-certification process, while the Stint carried no CE mark.
- Judges questioned why a line referencing the directive was deleted from the manual on the day of the 2018 crash as the defendants offered limited recollection and rejected any intent to conceal.
- Noorlander said the wording should have been different and Renzen said he neglected the manuals, as the prosecution pursues alleged document falsification charges in the six-day case.