The lawyers for the two men asked the Supreme Court to quash the convictions, because the Court of Appeal wrongly ruled that the suspects accepted the chance that the money transferred would end up with IS. According to the lawyer, this is not apparent from the evidence used. The defense also substantiated in the case why no intent was involved, and the convictions did not state why they deviated from this position.
Supreme Court: insufficient evidence against Utrecht brothers who allegedly financed terrorism, case must be reconsidered
