Narges Achikzei, who was set on fire, and her boyfriend had a heated conflict with the woman's 32-year-old former employer in Utrecht. The family is associated with fraudulent practices. In any case, they were accused by an aggrieved man. He himself was summoned to a court one week after the fire murder in connection with the slander. For a long time he is said to have sent e-mails to the woman - an ex-worker - and damaged her honour and good name.
It is very likely that this conflict played a role in the cruel death. The public prosecutor's office never wants to answer questions about the content of the legal conflict. It is clear that the conflict exerted great pressure on Achikzei and other participants.
Court of Utrecht,
Vrouwe Justitiaplein 1
3511 EX Utrecht
About: Request for access to the criminal file of executor MDNDR021 16/712372-09
Dear employee victim care A. van Doorn,
On behalf of myself and my bankrupt company Advios Assurantiën BV I appeal to article 51d of the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure and as victim/injured party I request copies of judicial documents belonging to the criminal proceedings against executor MDNDR021 who poured gasoline over and set fire to my former employee, my legal opponent and my extortionist N. Achikzei, after which her family/friends falsely pointed at me as the instructor/perpetrator, because I was supposed to be the only enemy that N. Achikzei had.
When it concerns N. Achikzei I am in view of the mentioned motives, what everyone has said about this and all the declarations undeniably a party. I find it more than dubious that ‘my’ Narges could not fulfil her appointment with the Public Prosecution Service in preparation for the false criminal case against me because of the fire murder 3 days earlier. From day one I have been hostile to the police, Justice and Narges’ family in both criminal cases. In order to avoid fuss with them, I have not been present at any of the criminal proceedings.
The overview below shows that with every other motive than “jealousy of MDNDR021” because of my alleged/claimed position as victim/man that the victim would have preferred to marry, I would have had direct access to all documents. I am not allowed to ‘bother’ the next of kin with my claimed right of access because of court rulings. According to an internet rumour, judicial documents refer to ‘obstruction of forced marriage’. I want to verify that.
Yours sincerely,
R. Geissen
N. Achikzei vs Geissen 16/440678-09 | OM vs A.MDNDR021 16/712372-09 | |
---|---|---|
R. Geissen | 100 % as an (ex) suspect | x % as …… |
N. Achikzei | 100 % as declarant/’victim’ | – |
Z. Mehraban | 100 % as declarant / ‘victim’ | 100 % as a relative |
S. Achikzei | 0 %, no declaration made | 100 % as a relative |
Mr. P.H. Ruijzendaal | 100 % as declarant and lawyer | 100 % as a lawyer for relatives |
MDNDR021 | 0 %, no party | 100 % as perpetrator |
Claim Geissen by reason and related right of access to the criminal record of MDNDR021:
Obstruction forced marriage, if I can’t get her then… | 100 % as a survivor |
Company extortion to enforce payout penalties | 100 % as a victim |
Completely out of control legal conflict | 100 % as a victim |
Relationship problems and love issues | 100 % as survivor/victim |
Honour-related violence/ ‘family honour’/’police honour’ | 100 % as survivor/victim |
MDNDR021 murdered her Love rival | 0 %, ‘no party’, but declaration made |
Latest posts
-
Eerwraak in Teheran: Moordenaar veroordeeld tot drie jaar gevangenisstraf
-
Eerwraak in Zehlendorf, Duitsland: Man steekt ex-vrouw dood
-
Man doodt vrouw en man in Gilan, Iran
-
Vrouw doodgeschoten voor de ogen van haar 4-jarige zoontje in Rijswijk
-
Eerwraak in Darrehshahr, Iran: 17-jarig meisje vermoord door haar vader
-
Eerwraak in Swat, Pakistan: Vrouw en drie dochters vermoord
-
Eerwraak in Gwalior, India: Vader wurgt zijn dochter
-
Femicide in Sib en Soran, Iran: Man vermoordt echtgenote en schoonmoeder
-
Eerwraak in Bhanpura, India: Vader gearresteerd voor moord op zijn dochter
-
Eerwraak in Khorasan Razavi, Iran: twee zussen vermoord