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.
judgment
COURT OF UTRECHT
Sector canton
Location Utrecht
Case number: 581426 UC EXPL 08-9098
judgment rendered in absentia on 9 July 2008
in terms of
Narges Achikzei
living at Zeist
additive no. 4 GW4533
authorised RBN Lawyers
the plaintiff,
against:
Advios Assurantiën B.V.
established Chilidreef 11
3563 HD Utrecht
defendant’s party
Recitals of the subdistrict court
The plaintiff has brought an action.
The defendant did not reply (on time) and did not request a postponement, so that a default was granted against the defendant.
Since the claim does not appear to the Subdistrict Court to be unlawful or unfounded, it will be allowed in default of appearance.
Condemns the defendant to pay the claimant against proof of discharge:
1. € 1,700.00 gross in respect of the salary for the month of May 2008;
2. € 1,632.00 gross in respect of unpaid holiday pay;
3. € 567.00 gross in respect of unpaid holidays;
4. the statutory increase in accordance with Section 7:625 of the Netherlands Civil Code of 50% over the amount referred to under 1. to 3. above.
amounts allocated;
5. the statutory interest on the allotted amount under 1. to 4. above, from 1 June 2008 until the day of fulfilment;
Case number: 581426 UC EXPL 08-9098 sheet 2
Decision
The cantonal judge:
orders the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings on the part of the plaintiff, until the ruling of this judgment estimated at € 461.44, which includes € 175.00 to the defendant, who has been ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings. salary of the authorised representative, to be paid to the Registrar of the District Court of Utrecht;
declares this judgment enforceable as a stock;
rejects the more or otherwise claimed.
This judgment was rendered by S.M. van Lieshout, subdistrict court judge, and is in the presence of the Registrar pronounced in public on 9 July 2008.

Latest posts
-
Eerwraak in Uttar Pradesh, India: Jonge vrouw vermoord door haar vader en broer
-
Man die echtgenote in brand stak in Duitse tram gearresteerd
-
Moordpoging in Duisburg: Moeder houdt vrouw vast bij haar haren terwijl zoon op haar insteekt
-
Eerwraak in Kermanshah, Iran: Jonge vrouw vermoord door haar vader
-
Eerwraak in Tirana, Albanië: Palestijnse vader verdacht van verkrachting en moord dochter
-
Eerwraak in Argenteuil, Frankrijk: 25 jaar gevangenisstraf geëist tegen twee broers
-
Eerwraak in Bidar, India: Vader vermoordt dochter om ‘ongehoorzaamheid’ in relatiekeuze
-
Eerwraak in Maku, Iran: Vrouw en 11-jarig kind vermoord door de vader van het gezin
-
Eerwraak in Piranshahr, Iran: Kani Abdollahi (17) vermoord door haar vader
-
Eerwraak in Apeldoorn: Justitie eist 25 jaar cel