Narges Achikzei sent several emails to her employer Ralph Geissen under the screen name Narges Mehraban. Mehraban is the last name of Narges Achikzei’s fiancé, Haroen. Narges and her sister Sahar had an uncertain residency status, which caused the IND to refuse to issue work permits for internships or employment.
Because Geissen, on behalf of Advios Assurantiën BV, had initiated appeals against the IND, Narges and Sahar were allowed to intern and work as long as the IND had not made a definitive negative decision regarding their work permits. Before Sahar joined as an intern, Geissen had made it clear to Narges that he was willing to file appeals against the IND and offer a good salary, but there were certainly disadvantages to employing two Afghan sisters, and he absolutely did not want any problems. Narges then assured Geissen that they would never do anything to make him angry. Narges said she had the highest salary in her family and that her monthly income of €1,700 was high enough to rent her own apartment. She also stated that she did not believe in God, enjoyed eating pork, and never participated in Ramadan. According to Geissen, Narges Achikzei had fallen in love with him and aspired to move from an internship contract to a permanent contract and ultimately to marriage. Geissen claims that Narges made numerous advances toward him, which he repeatedly rejected. "I will marry a man of my own choice later, or burn in hell!" and "marry an Afghan man or a wealthy friend!" were frequent statements from Narges during the period before her behavior towards Geissen, in the lead-up to her forced marriage, changed completely. 
Narges told Geissen that she had to start reading the Quran, distance herself from him, that he shouldn’t think money could buy everything, that she was his equal, that he needed to see a psychiatrist, and that she had to marry an Afghan man whose parents knew her parents.
Narges was using her work PC during work hours, dealing with Islam, marriage, choosing a course, resignation, finding another job, and getting her own rental apartment.
Geissen transferred €650 to Narges from his private account because she had been insisting for weeks that she wanted more money as she had a one-year contract for 36 hours but was working 40 hours a week. Geissen made a calculation and paid €650 as a one-off payment, and then gave €150 per month in cash in an envelope.
He experienced the whole situation as fraud and extortion by an employee and reluctantly paid a total of €1,500 from his own bank account because the accounting firm and an investment company involved as shareholders in Advios would never have approved these extra payments. 
In the last month of Narges' annual contract, the conflict escalates and Geissen decides to dismiss her for gross misconduct due to a death threat made against him by someone emailing under her name.
Narges yelled at Geissen over the phone that he had offended her faith, while in the background someone could be heard encouraging her to be more aggressive.
Report filed by Geissen at Police Utrecht against Narges and her family and friends due to a death threat, with emails submitted to the police. The president of the Utrecht court would later qualify the threat, after some explanation by Geissen, as a “subtle death threat”.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Narges receives the keys to her own apartment. She gets an apartment on the 12th floor of Geroflat. The nameplate displays two names: N. Achikzei & Z. Mehraban ("Zaman" is Haroen Mehraban's official first name).
On the website InternetFraud.com, in the topic “Scammed by N. Mehraban Account Number 47.86.32.320,” victims published several complaints against Ms. N. Mehraban and her husband/partner for fraud.
People are warned not to do business with Ms. Narges Mehraban, and fellow victims are asked to combine all complaints so the police can recognize this as a duo that has scammed dozens of victims via Marketplace.nl. 
Narges Achikzei and Haroen Mehraban file a report against ex-employer Ralph Geissen with the notorious Zeist police. Geissen allegedly committed stalking via email.
"In April 2008, Narges Achikzei received an email from Mr. Geissen regarding her contract, which was set to expire on June 1st. The email stated that he could not extend the contract because he had conflicts with her 40-year-old Afghan husband. Narges Achikzei then called Mr. Geissen to ask about the details of the email. Mr. Geissen claimed that Narges Achikzei had lied to him and was overly influenced by her 40-year-old Afghan husband, and that a death threat had been sent from her work account on the day of her Muslim marriage, even though Narges Achikzei and Haroen Mehraban were not married. Narges Achikzei then told Mr. Geissen that he should not meddle in her private life and stop sending emails. (...) Narges Achikzei and Haroen Mehraban discussed the situation with Mr. Geissen’s family members when they came to collect office supplies from Narges Achikzei. Haroen Mehraban tried to speak with Mr. Geissen, asking him to stop emailing and told him that he had nothing to do with a supposed death threat. Mr. Geissen’s response was that he wanted to marry Narges Achikzei in 4 months. Narges Achikzei and Haroen Mehraban have been experiencing sleep and concentration problems at school because of the whole situation and want Mr. Geissen to stop emailing."
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Victim of fraud by Ms. N. Mehraban had filed a report with the police and subsequently received the personal details of Narges Mehraban. These were verified and sent to Ralph Geissen, and also shared with the moderators of InternetFraud.com:
Narges Mehraban, born 18-09-1986, SINCE 19-06-2008: Laan van Vollenhove 2175.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Complaint by Narges and Haroen against Geissen with Anita Frielink (ps) of the notorious Zeist police. For insult, defamation, and slander. They state they do not know internet scammers Mrs. Narges Mehraban and her husband. They feel insulted by Geissen and claim their good name and honor have been damaged.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Due to a civil summons from lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal, Ralph Geissen chooses to remove his negative posts about Narges Achikzei/Narges Mehraban and her Muslim husband Haroen Mehraban from GodForDummies.com, BuyersInterests.com, and InternetFraud.com.
Officer Anita Frielink (alias) is dishonest because she lied in her official report claiming she called ABN AMRO regarding internet fraudster Narges Mehraban and that her investigation revealed they are “completely different people,” and that Geissen allegedly admitted during the interrogation to making a “huge mistake.”
Frielink's nasty false claim that Geissen committed defamation, slander, and insult because he wanted to marry Narges himself put all parties under significant pressure. 
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Ruling by the Utrecht court in the case of lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal against Ralph Geissen/Advios Insurance Ltd for defamation, slander, and insult.
“On the site yelloyello.com, Geissen posted the following text on January 12, 2009: “Mr. P.H. Ruijzendaal is accused of engaging in extorting companies on behalf of a Muslim fundamentalist criminal organization. Utrecht police are currently investigating the case, and Mr. P.H. Ruijzendaal is therefore formally a “suspect” of complicity in attempted fraud and extortion.” 
Source: Ruling Utrecht Court Ruijzendaal vs Geissen/Advios
The Utrecht court rules in favor of Geissen in a complaint procedure against Utrecht police: his report was wrongfully refused by Utrecht police. The Public Prosecution Service instructs Sergeant Hans Hameeteman to send an invitation letter so an appointment can be made to record Geissen's report against Narges Achikzei and others.
Report by Ralph Geissen against Narges Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, and lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal at Zeist police for threats, fraud, (legal) extortion, group stalking, filing false reports, defamation, and the consecration of an illegal informal Muslim marriage without a prior civil marriage.
Geissen claims a damage of around €150,000 as the major shareholder of Advios Insurance Ltd due to all the trouble surrounding the legal extortion campaign by Narges Achikzei. Sergeant Hans Hameeteman told Geissen that he is the first person to file a report under section 449 of the law regarding a forced informal Muslim marriage. 
Source: Report by Ralph Geissen against Narges Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, and Peter Ruijzendaal
Ralph Geissen and Advios Insurance Ltd were declared bankrupt by the Utrecht court at the request of Narges Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, and his lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal. Advios Insurance Ltd had been in existence for exactly 10 years, and Insurance Magazine paid attention to the bankruptcy:
“The conflict with two employees was the final blow. “I was destroyed in court.” According to Geissen, their claims are dubious; a police report for fraud has been filed against them.” Geissen was not present at the bankruptcy hearing, according to trustee Dingemans, due to a death threat. 
Zeist Chief of Police Johan de Boer (ps) writes to Ralph Geissen that Zeist Police decides to refrain from investigation against Narges Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, and Peter Ruijzendaal.
Ralph Geissen is being prosecuted by a (anonymous male) Public Prosecutor for defamation and stalking via email on behalf of Narges Achikzei and her friend Haroen Mehraban.
The summons included Geissen's alleged defamatory/libelous messages on websites such as GodForDummies.com, InternetFraud.com, and BuyersInterests.com. All those messages had already been removed at Geissen's request. The criminal hearing was scheduled for 15-12-2009. 
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Complaint by Haroen Mehraban against Ralph Geissen at Zeist Police for defamation. Haroen Mehraban feels his honor and good name are insulted because he and his girlfriend Narges Achikzei are accused of fraud on the internet. He fears that something will happen to him or a family member.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
The future murderer of Narges Achikzei, who is the sister of a friend of Haroen Mehraban, tries to make an appointment with Narges Achikzei under a pseudonym to discuss a problem. Narges did not want that.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
Lawyer Ruijzendaal files a report against Ralph Geissen at the notorious Binnensticht office in Zeist for defamation/libel. Ruijzendaal feels his honor and good name are damaged due to Geissen's public criticism of his actions regarding his client Narges Achikzei.
SOURCE: CRIMINAL CASE 16/440678-09
The Public Prosecutor informs Peter Ruijzendaal, as a co-complainant, that he has summoned Ralph Geissen in the case of Narges Achikzei to appear before the police judge in Utrecht on December 15, 2009, at 14:40.
Invitation from the (anonymous male) Public Prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service to Narges Achikzei and Peter Ruijzendaal to discuss their defamation case against Geissen in detail on December 10, 2009, at the Public Prosecution Office.
Probation officer Annelies Balfoort calls Geissen to discuss the pre-sentencing report she had prepared for the criminal case. Geissen expressed dissatisfaction with the report and argued for changes.
The report stated that his sister and mother did not support him, even though this was never mentioned in the meeting Geissen and Balfoort had at the Probation Office in Utrecht. Balfoort quickly agreed with Geissen, and the pre-sentencing report was revised on that point. 
A week before her false criminal trial against her former employer and two weeks before her forced marriage to Haroen Mehraban, Narges was doused in gasoline and set on fire near her apartment on Laan van Vollenhove in Zeist, in front of a running surveillance camera.
The murderer is the sister of a friend of Haroen Mehraban.
Based on visitor statistics from LittleTroublemaker.com, Geissen discovered that something terrible had happened in Zeist. Geissen called Zeist Police and asked for confirmation if Narges Achikzei was the woman who was set on fire on Laan van Vollenhove in Zeist.
At that time, the authorities had not yet released her name. After a brief silence, they stated that Geissen would be called back. He then received a phone confirmation that it was indeed Narges, that two team leaders had been assigned to the investigation team, and that Geissen could speak with two detectives the next day at a police station in Utrecht. According to the detective, Geissen's name was already on a list of people the investigation team wanted to talk to. Geissen pointed to Haroen Mehraban/Peter Ruijzendaal as being involved in the murder and urged the authorities to bring them to trial before the court chamber for the arson murder.
During the conversation with investigators, Geissen first had to explain how he knew that Narges was the woman who had been set on fire since her name had not yet been made public by the police.
Geissen stated that someone with an IP address belonging to the Rotterdam Medical Center had Googled “Afghan woman Zeist” and “Narges Achikzei” and ended up on his website LittleTroublemaker.com. Shortly after, Geissen saw news reports from RTV Utrecht that a woman had been set on fire and died on Laan van Vollenhove in Zeist. During the conversation with two investigators, Geissen said that, in his view, this was a case of honor killing. Narges wanted to marry a man of her own choice, was in love with him, and had likely caused problems for which she was punished by her criminal family and bad friends. Geissen said that Dutch people don’t set women on fire and that they should look for Afghan perpetrators. The investigator asked Geissen if he knew why Narges believed she would be prosecuted. Geissen responded that it was only a matter of time before she would be prosecuted, given all the complaints filed against her. The investigator stated that Geissen had done his best to free her, which Geissen confirmed. The investigator told Geissen that his 20-page complaint had been taken up by the team. Police spokespersons also referred to this promise in newspaper articles. Geissen showed his phone to the investigators and said that at the time of the burning murder, he was on the phone with probation officer Balfoort. An investigator recognized the phone number of Reclassering Nederland and said, “yes, that’s us!”. It was agreed that Geissen could send emails with useful tips to the Zeist police, the headquarters of the investigation team. Geissen’s emails to Zeist police about Narges Achikzei would, according to the investigators, reach them. An investigator told Geissen that Narges’s family members waved court rulings at the investigators and shouted that Geissen must pay money.
National Expertise Center Honor-Related Violence (LEC EGG) involved due to indications of honor killing in the murder of Narges Achikzei.
An anonymous detective involved in the investigation of Narges Achikzei's murder said on Radio M Utrecht: “Female victim of honor killing and due to extortion of a company”.
This fact was picked up and processed in similar news reports in Telegraaf, Elsevier, and Zeister Courant.
The police and the Public Prosecution Service do not want to answer questions because the case is under investigation. "The police are considering honor killing. The victim was about to marry. The marriage had already been concluded according to Islamic law. This explains the cohabitation without marriage."
The woman who was set on fire had been in conflict with her former employer for months. Her sister, friend, and lawyer were also accused by the man in numerous publications of fraud and threats.”
Dingemans, who was appointed by the court of Midden-Nederland as the curator for the bankruptcy of Geissen/Advios, advised Geissen to contact RTV Utrecht journalist Bart van den Berg (PvdA).
According to Bart van den Berg, curator Dingemans had told him that in his view, there was "mutual affection" between Geissen and Narges, and the journalist wanted to hear Geissen's response to that. Geissen shared his side of the story and stated that Narges was most likely a victim of honor revenge due to all the trouble surrounding the fraud and extortion practices of her criminal family and bad friends. Bart van den Berg also mentioned that RTV Utrecht had received many emails from people pointing to Geissen as the murderer.
The Public Prosecution Service refuses to comment on questions about the legal conflict of Narges Achikzei. The legal complications are being investigated by the investigative team. The police state that the motive is unclear.
Journalist Bart Lauret adds that it is clear that the conflict put Narges Achikzei and other involved parties under great pressure.
RTV Utrecht broadcast featuring an anonymized friend of Narges' mother pointing to Ralph Geissen as the likely perpetrator/instigator of the arson. According to this anonymous witness, Narges was very happy with Haroen, and no one suspects honor revenge.
The witness is critical of the police, stating that they only began working after Narges had been set on fire.
According to lawyer Ruijzendaal, the mayor of Zeist, Koos Janssen (CDA), promised Sahar Achikzei that he would do what is necessary to end the unlawful actions of Geissen via the internet.
Investigators emphasized in a personal conversation with Geissen that he should absolutely not attend Narges's funeral. They could not guarantee his safety there. All Afghans they spoke to mentioned his name.
Stories appear online from Narges's family and friends that Geissen, as a rejected ex-employer in love, ordered the honor killing because he couldn't have Narges, who wanted to marry her Afghan fiancé Haroen out of love and free choice. Investigators who spoke to Geissen told him that they had asked Narges's family and friends to stop their accusations against him on the internet. 
Geissen points out to a detective a private forum for Afghan girls where acquaintances of Narges complain about this honor revenge and strange statements from her cold-hearted mother.
Parliamentary questions from MP De Krom (VVD) to the Minister of Justice regarding the woman from Zeist who was set on fire. “-Is this an honor killing? Can you explain this? -Is it true that in this case, an Islamic marriage was conducted without a prior civil marriage?
How is this possible? Can you explain this?” (Source: kv-44825)
44 pages of defamation and slander from family and friends of Narges Achikzei against her former employer and legal opponent Geissen, showing that the murder victim was also known within the Afghan community as Narges Mehraban-Achikzei due to her informal Muslim marriage.
Source: 44 pages of defamation/slander against former employer
Neighbors of Narges Achikzei express their distrust towards the notorious police in Zeist and the Public Prosecution Service. Initially, no one seems to trust that detectives will handle the murder of their acquaintance Narges strictly according to law and regulations.
"Honestly, I don't trust the experience and approach of the Zeist police. And whether it was an honor revenge, I don't know either, she didn’t have the best friends." "Neighbors claim that love troubles are the cause of the drama." "According to neighbors, the woman’s death is related to relational problems." "When I spoke with the police about the murder, they knew about the internet fraud, but they didn’t want to inform me." "I don't believe the judiciary will open the can of worms and put this family and their clan under a magnifying glass." "It’s no coincidence that her former employer worked hard to show that they are bad people!"
Source: Testimonies against Zeist police and Narges’ friends
RTV Utrecht reports that the police do not rule out that the murderer received assistance from third parties. Regarding the motive, the police, according to spokesperson Thomas Aling, have not disclosed further details.
The examining magistrate strongly reproached Geissen for sending emails to Sahar Achikzei after the murder and granted the motion that Geissen must see a psychiatrist. This is standard procedure when the charge includes stalking, apparently also for "stalking via email".
Geissen objected to the continuation of the prosecution, arguing that the complainant Narges Achikzei was set on fire, and her family and friends are openly and falsely accusing Geissen as the likely perpetrator/instigator. Geissen expressed fear that the prosecution might take on a life of its own in the media and requested the examining magistrate to obtain the identification details of internet fraudster Narges Mehraban from ABN AMRO and end the false prosecution.
Crime journalist Korterink had never spoken to Geissen, but based on the available data on the internet, he concluded the following: “For clarification: the ‘employer’ would have liked to marry Afghan Narges Achikzei (his annual contract employee), but the Afghan family apparently did not see any potential in it.
Now someone has been arrested for this arson murder. For the real background, we must go to a website, which will probably be offline shortly after this message.” The website Korterink refers to is LittleTroublemaker.com, the website of Geissen, which covers the fraud and extortion practices of Narges Achikzei, Sahar Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, Peter Ruijzendaal, Police Zeist, and the Public Prosecution Service.
Geissen was ordered by a detective to take down his website about Narges Achikzei, called LittleTroublemaker.com, or else the detective would come to seize Geissen's computer. Geissen decided to comply with the officer's request and removed the pages about the fraud of Narges Achikzei and others from the internet.
Geissen redirected LittleTroublemaker.com to the investigation page of the detective team.
Broadcast of Opsporing Verzocht about the arson murder of Narges Achikzei with the following quote: “No one needs to call to point the police to the legal conflict Narges Achikzei was involved in. A conflict that had nothing to do with her Islamic background.”
The police publish their investigation questions on politie.nl and would like to speak with witnesses who can confirm jealousy as a motive. No one needs to point out the legal entanglements in which Narges Achikzei was involved. Regarding the most mentioned motives, politie.nl writes:
“Narges is Afghan, and there are people who immediately thought it might be honor revenge. But the police have no evidence to suggest this is the case, although they do not rule it out. There are also rumors that her death may be related to legal conflicts that Narges was involved in, conflicts unrelated to her Islamic background.”
Source: Police.nl - Murder of Narges Achikzei
The suggestion of honor revenge has been denied by the relatives, and police spokesperson Thomas Aling states that there is no evidence of honor revenge. The police are familiar with the most mentioned motives of honor revenge and an escalated legal conflict, but according to Aling, a very different motive is also conceivable, such as someone being jealous that Narges was going to marry.
Source: AD/Utrecht Newspaper
Haroen Mehraban is friends with the brother of the murderer, which is why a crime of passion is not excluded in the police investigation.
Source: AD/Utrecht Newspaper
No answers to the parliamentary questions regarding the woman set on fire in Zeist (honor killing? Islamic marriage without civil marriage?): "Honor-related violence is a possibility that the police and the Public Prosecution Service are taking into account. In the interest of this investigation, I cannot make further statements at this moment."
Currently, I cannot comment on the Islamic marriage, as the criminal investigation is still ongoing in this case."
Source: Parliamentary questions about the woman set on fire in Zeist
Neighbors point to the problems Narges Achikzei was facing. According to a neighbor, she allegedly had serious issues with her former employer, was involved in fraud and extortion, and associated with women linked to a loverboy circuit.
The season finale of Opsporing Verzocht was a retrospective on the murder of Narges Achikzei. Team leader Tijn Keuss received criticism the day after the broadcast from crime journalist Korterink for his "outrageous performance" because Keuss firmly stated that there was no honor revenge involved and that the motive lay in jealousy, while the case had never been brought to court.
Crime journalist Korterink reports that there are threats in the case of the murder of Narges Achikzei. The threat is directed at former employer Ralph Geissen. User "Ralph you will pay": "I am not the fiancé. Who I am doesn’t matter. What matters is that you will pay for your crimes. Get ready."
Ralph Geissen files a complaint against Haroen Mehraban and lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal for the murder of Narges Achikzei with the Utrecht police. Officer Hans Hameeteman advised against filing the complaint in Zeist so that the prosecution decision would be made by another Public Prosecutor.
This wish was explicitly expressed in the complaint. In the complaint, Geissen states that his research shows Maiwand Achikzei purchased the motor oil, that Sahar Achikzei rang the doorbell to lure Narges Achikzei downstairs while the murderer waited one floor below with her murder plan. According to Geissen, the motives are honor revenge, fraud, extortion, and corruption. Geissen supported the conclusion of the most honest detective: Narges Achikzei was set on fire by the sister of a friend of her fiancé because she obstructed a forced marriage and a failed legal extortion campaign against her former employer. The reporting officer pointed out Geissen's attribution to Narges Achikzei’s statement: "Marry an Afghan man or a rich friend!" and asked whether he could prove that Narges meant him by "rich friend." Geissen responded that Narges did a dance, as girls in love do, after saying those words, and he assumed without question that she was in love with him. Much to Geissen's dismay, his complaint was forwarded by the Utrecht police to the Zeist police, handled by officer Jelle van de Kraats, and assessed by the same (anonymous) Public Prosecutor who was responsible for Geissen's prolonged false prosecution in 2009.
Source: Complaint Ralph Geissen
Murder suspect Haroen Mehraban, who was allowed to continue living at Laan van Vollenhove 2175 after the murder of Narges Achikzei, feels insulted because Geissen publicly stated that Narges was a victim of honor killing and that Mehraban/Ruijzendaal are the likely perpetrators.
Haroen Mehraban seeks legal aid so that he and his lawyer Ruijzendaal, also suspected of murder, can once again file a civil case against Narges Achikzei's ex-employer Geissen, who has been worn down by lawsuits. Naturally, they also demand money. Both Ruijzendaal and Mehraban demand immediate payment of €5,000 each as an advance on the imposed penalties for defamation at the Utrecht court. Geissen did not attend the hearing, against their wishes, as he did not want a confrontation with murder suspects who once again falsely present themselves to gullible judges as pitiable victims. 
Murder suspect Haroen Mehraban said he would prefer to set the killer on fire himself. The court interrupted Haroen after he threatened the suspect with burning. The suspect has stated twice that she was not in love with Haroen or jealous of Narges, as prosecutors have argued.
According to her lawyer, Willem Jan Ausma, jealousy cannot be substantiated by the Public Prosecution Service, and there must be another explanation. The prosecutor claims that Narges Achikzei was murdered out of jealousy. "Someone did not want Narges to get married." Ausma advised his client to remain silent about her motive and stated that staying in a TBS clinic would be better for her. Ausma presented an alternative scenario "for the show." According to Ausma, it is possible that his client has a multiple personality disorder. He found an expert who spoke with the suspect several times and produced a report suggesting that the suspect might have a multiple personality disorder. Ausma states that his client wants to be treated in a TBS clinic as soon as possible.
From the survivor's statement of Haroen Mehraban, which was spoken in court, it appears that a charred Narges Achikzei screamed the name of her fiancé Haroen, who is a friend of the murderer's brother.
Verdict of the Utrecht court in the case of Haroen Mehraban and Peter Ruijzendaal versus Ralph Geissen, after a brief investigation: “3.1. prohibits Geissen from immediately sending emails, publishing articles on the internet, and making statements to third parties accusing the plaintiffs of crimes and causing damage;
3.2. orders the defendant to, within one week of the service of this judgment, remove the messages and images already published by (or on behalf of) him on various internet forums and websites about and of the plaintiffs.”
Mark Lauriks (Labour Party), working as a senior advisor at the Ministry of Justice, says on Twitter: “Afghan, then. Many cases are called ‘honor killings,’ but they are not at all. I know this case a little. I am not easily saddened by intense criminal cases anymore, but this is indeed a very gruesome end.
I have handled 2 real honor killing cases (murders), but those are true rarities… And honor killing is also not Islam, another misunderstanding.”
Report from officer Anita Frielink (ps) against Ralph Geissen for defamation in his publications "Solution Zeist Arson Murder Narges Achikzei" and "Lies Police Zeist Arson Murder".
Colleague of Anita Frielink (ps), John van Wilpen, contacted Geissen's colleagues and demanded the address details of the hiding Geissen and removal of the so-called defamation, slander, and insult.
Source: Report from Anita Frielink (ps)
The Public Prosecutor stated in their argument that it was up to the murderer to provide more insight, but she did not. “There is no explanation, no diminished responsibility, no treatment advice, no estimation of the risk of recurrence. The victim was burned alive. Could it be worse?”
Contradictory speaker Harro Kras in Magazine MR: “The investigation team continued to critically review all scenarios.” and “Sometimes, the pressure from the public and media promotes the risk of tunnel vision,” states Harro Kras from Utrecht police.
He cites as an example the investigation into the murder of a 23-year-old Afghan woman from Zeist. She died in December 2009 after being set on fire. Honor killing was taken into account. “The media were all over it. Experts lined up to share their views on this so-called honor killing. Meanwhile, a female suspect from the victim's friend circle is on trial for this murder, where the motive of honor killing is clearly not relevant. The case demonstrates the strength of the investigation team.”
Source: Harro Kras in Magazine MR
Verdict in the Narges Achikzei murder case: “At 4:39 PM, the person is first spotted near the [apartment]. The person initially enters the adjacent [apartment] (where the parental home of [victim] is located).
(…) No evidence was found for pathological jealousy or vengeful actions by the suspect in general or specifically towards the victim.”
Source:
Source: nr. 16.712372-09
Zeist Police Chief Johan de Boer (ps) again refuses to request identifying data of Narges Mehraban from ABN AMRO. He believes Ralph Geissen should direct his request for identifying data from ABN AMRO to the court rather than to the Zeist police or the 25-person investigation team.
According to journalist Bart van den Berg (PVDAG), the reason for Narges' murder is not known. "The murderer says he can't remember anything from that night, and the psychologists who examined her don't really know either. They did determine that she had depression, but that's not grounds for murder."
Riks Ozinga further explains that the police sent the gruesome surveillance footage of the murder of Narges Achikzei to RTV Utrecht.
The Public Prosecution Service refuses impartial factual investigation by the National Investigation Department. Chief Public Prosecutor Johan Bac sees no concrete evidence that could justify involving the National Investigation Department in an investigation into the Zeist arson murder.
Because Ralph Geissen points to corrupt police officers such as Anita Frielink (ps) and Johan de Boer (ps), Johan Bac sees no reason to address Geissen’s letter on this point. Since it involves the same set of facts, the same (anonymous male) Public Prosecutor who was responsible for Geissen's false prosecution will also have to decide whether Haroen Mehraban/Peter Ruijzendaal should be prosecuted by the Public Prosecution Service.
The Public Prosecution dismisses all false accusations from Narges Achikzei, Haroen Mehraban, Peter Ruijzendaal, and Anita Frielink (ps) against Ralph Geissen conditionally, with a probation period of 2 years.
The same (anonymous) Public Prosecutor, who had scheduled a meeting with Narges Achikzei on December 10, 2009, to discuss her defamation case, after three delays, decides not to share his false criminal case with the judges.
Handling of the disciplinary complaint by Ralph Geissen against lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal due to accusations of involvement in the Zeist arson murder and his wish to have Ruijzendaal suspended during the police investigation given the nature of the accusation regarding possible involvement in the arson murder of his client Narges Achikzei.
Tijn Keuss had allegedly told Ruijzendaal that he had received several emails from Geissen and according to Ruijzendaal, Keuss added that Geissen was obstructing the criminal investigation with his online publications. The Disciplinary Board was curious about the results of the investigation due to Geissen’s complaint against Ruijzendaal/Haroen Mehraban, but refused to suspend Ruijzendaal during that investigation.
Source: CrimeJournalist.nl, Zeist arson murder (Narges) smolders on
The suspect denies jealousy in the appeal: “I had nothing against her.” The tweets from an observer at the Pieter Baan Centre during the appeal prove that he and the murderer reject jealousy as a motive.
From the public gallery, there were almost spontaneous shouts at the suspect: "You could never have gotten him!" RTV Utrecht followed lawyer Willem Jan Ausma in this case (2nd report, 3rd report)
Appeal ruling in the murder case of Narges Achikzei: “The CCTV footage from the Gero apartment building shows that the murderer was in the vicinity of the Gero apartment, where Narges Achikzei lived, and the L-apartment, where the victim's parents lived, about an hour before the crime occurred.
She entered the Gero apartment, which she shortly left again, only to return and take the elevator upstairs. (…) The motive remains unclear, although there are some indications in the case file that the suspect may have been jealous of Narges Achikzei.”
Source: Source: ECLI:NL:GHARL:2013:6057
Lead investigator Rob van Noort speaks positively about murder suspect Haroen Mehraban on RTV Utrecht while standing in the spotlight on the Laan van Vollenhove in Zeist, reflecting on the infamous murder case of Narges Achikzei.
According to Rob van Noort, Haroen Mehraban "made very impressive use" of his right to speak as a family member in court.
Geissen starts an Article 12 procedure against the decision of the Public Prosecutor not to prosecute Mehraban/Ruijzendaal as (co)perpetrators of threats, fraud, extortion, defamation, libel, false reporting, and the murder of Narges Achikzei.
The Bar Association confirmed to Geissen that Peter Ruijzendaal has recently passed away.
The Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court does not want to prosecute Haroen Mehraban/Peter Ruijzendaal as the instigators of the arson murder of Narges Achikzei. In their opinion, Ralph Geissen is not even a victim in the murder case of his former employee.
“The complainant claims, albeit on completely speculative grounds, that the murder was allegedly planned by Haroen Mehraban and Peter Ruijzendaal, a lawyer in Zeist. The complaint and its annexes do not show any relevant interest of the complainant. From the foregoing, it follows that the complaint is evidently inadmissible. Therefore, a hearing of the parties involved can be omitted.”
Request from Geissen to the Public Prosecutor for access to the criminal file of the murderer regarding the murder of Narges Achikzei. According to a neighborhood resident, judicial documents mention 'obstruction of forced marriage'.
Geissen wants to verify this. The Public Prosecutor denied Geissen access to the criminal file of the murderer because, according to the Public Prosecutor, he is not a party to this case.
Wilfred Janmaat from the National Expertise Center (LEC) for Honor-Related Violence responds to Ralph Geissen's criticism. He confirms that the LEC EGG advised the police in the murder case of Narges Achikzei and wants to emphasize to Geissen that multiple scenarios, including honor-related violence, were considered in that investigation.
According to Janmaat, the cultural interpretation of a motive is complex. Sometimes, cases may seem like clear instances of honor violence to someone without all the information, but this is not always confirmed in an investigation that considers all available information. Janmaat states that the local police have already answered all of Geissen's questions and that he himself will no longer respond to Geissen's emails in the future.
Peter Bourgonje from the National Investigation Department responded negatively by phone, in writing, and by email to Ralph Geissen's request to initiate a fact-finding investigation into the murder of Narges Achikzei.
Anita Frielink (ps) files a complaint against Geissen again for defamation. The following passage is from her complaint: "After the suspect was questioned, shortly after he posted something on the internet about me claiming I was corrupt. Not only I, but the entire Zeist police force would be corrupt."
He had posted this on his own website, ExpirationWeb.com. It was a public site. (…) After that, Ralph Geissen started a slander campaign against the police and against me. He says I am a corrupt police officer who twisted the truth and would indirectly be responsible for the murder of Narges Achikzei." (...) I find it extremely offensive and hurtful that the suspect portrays me this way in the media with a photo he took from my Facebook. I experience this as a very serious and severe invasion of my privacy and moreover, it harms my reputation as an officer. Anyone who Googles my name will see and read this. Mr. Geissen spreads big lies and insults about me.
Source: Complaint of the shameless corrupt officer Anita Frielink
Korterink publishes a critical timeline by Geissen about the poor performance of Narges Achikzei, her family/fiancé/lawyer/friends, the Zeist police, and the Public Prosecution Service. Korterink: "Ralph Geissen, Narges's ex-employer, who was quite in love with her, sees a conspiracy with honor revenge.
That Narges actually did not want to marry the man she was supposed to marry. He has been working on this for years. He resents me for not agreeing with him and has tried to file a complaint against me with the Dutch Press Council. Everyone is free to have and express their opinion, but what I find troubling in his case is that he – in my view wrongly – accuses various parties involved. He has now made a timeline. On the second page, he calls Narges 'a fraud'. There’s more that, in my opinion, is unacceptable, but judge for yourself. See here: "
Brand murder Zeist: a cover-up? A timeline.
Because Johan de Boer (ps) has retired, his successor Nick Schellings, on behalf of the Zeist police, filed a complaint against Geissen. Schellings supports his subordinate Frielink and states that the Zeist police have taken note of the insult/defamation/slander by Geissen in relation to the investigation into the murder of Narges Achikzei.
"As team leader, I have taken note of the insult/defamation/slander against various police officers and the Zeist police. Following the investigation into the death of a woman on Laan van Vollenhove in Zeist in 2009, various police officers have regularly (hundreds) received emails from the email account GEISSEN@gmail.com from 2010 to the present. GEISSEN@gmail.com made disparaging, insulting remarks about the mentioned police investigation, the police, particularly the Zeist police, and various specifically named police officers. (...) On January 6, 2017, another email was sent to the work account of a police officer. I saw/read that the Zeist police were described as a collective of corrupt individuals. On May 9, 2017, another email was sent from the email account GEISSEN@gmail.com. I saw/read that it referred to Zeist police in connection with corrupt colleagues, and the Binnensticht station as the most notorious police station in the Netherlands and corrupt Zeist police."
Geissen brings crime journalist Korterink before the Council for Journalism because he unjustly labeled Geissen as a conspiracy theorist in his publication of the timeline about the Zeist arson murder, while Geissen sees himself as an honest whistleblower.
In his first publication, Korterink falsely pointed to Geissen as a possible perpetrator. According to Korterink, there is no slander or threats against Geissen, and he himself accuses Geissen of slandering lawyer Peter Ruijzendaal and fiancé Haroen Mehraban. Korterink emails Geissen, calling him confused, obsessive, brooding, infatuated with Narges, and showing signs of a fanciful psychiatric patient. After persistent urging, Korterink removed 50% of the slander and threats against Geissen from his site. He explicitly reserves the right to "use the story of Narges's family and friends for future publications." Korterink is the only journalist asserting that Narges is a victim of a jealous romantic rival. He argues that motive and logic are lacking in Geissen's proposed scenario. He sees no evidence of family honor requiring revenge by arson against the beautiful Narges. However, Korterink defended Geissen's right to freedom of expression on his site, responding to a visitor's criticism with, "Everyone must draw their own conclusions; the fact is that Ralph is deeply engaged in these matters." The Council for Journalism ruled that Korterink acted carefully and that Geissen can be called a conspiracy theorist for pointing to a conspiracy involving honor revenge in the Zeist arson case. Geissen then asked the Council for Journalism to anonymize their verdict, which they did. Korterink had censored some of Geissen's comments under the news article.
Source: Council for Journalism ruling 201725
The Public Prosecution Service rejects all requests from Ralph Geissen and does not wish to respond substantively to the accusations: "The Public Prosecution Service understands from Geissen's messages that he has filed a complaint with the Dutch Press Council against a journalist.
He claims that the outcome of the complaint procedure with the Dutch Press Council could be very negative for the police (specifically the police in Zeist) and the Public Prosecution Service. Geissen asserts that the murder of Mrs. Narges Achikzei was not the work of a single person, but involved a group of perpetrators and honor revenge."
At the request of Geissen, BNN VARA will not air the episode about the Zeist arson murder in the series "The Family Investigator" by documentary maker Jessica Villerius, in which family investigators Erik van den Bos and Saskia from Zeist Police tell their fabricated stories about Narges Achikzei.
Source: Emails from BNN Vara
Response to the police's invitation to Ralph Geissen for arrest and questioning regarding the insult of civil servant Anita Frielink (ps): "My complaint about the police and judiciary is well known. There is no defamation/slander on my part because I have legally proven my case."
I have no trust in the police and judiciary regarding this case and choose not to appear for the scheduled questioning. It has been legally proven that the police and judiciary have made severe mistakes with Narges Achikzei. Everyone must live with my criticism. Please schedule a hearing date so I can send my documents to the court."
Lawyer Willem Jan Ausma states in a magazine that Narges Achikzei was someone to be jealous of. Beautiful Narges was in the prime of her life. Her education as an accountant was almost finished, and she was about to marry her great love, Haroen Mehraban.
Source: Lawyer Willem Jan Ausma on the Zeist Arson Murder in MR Magazine
Through his own website, InvestigateHonorKilling.com, Geissen publishes 225 testimonies about the murder of Narges Achikzei, which have been placed in an innovative diagram so that at a glance, it is clear which motives are mentioned the most.
The Public Prosecution Service summons Geissen for defamation, slander, and insult towards officers Anita Frielink (ps) and Johan de Boer (ps).
“Geissen is accused of intentionally dishonoring and/or damaging the reputation of a public official, named Anita Frielink (ps), Chief Inspector in Baarn, during and/or in connection with the lawful exercise of her duties, by accusing her of a specific act, with the apparent intention of publicizing it, through writings or images distributed, openly displayed, or posted, as Geissen posted a video on YouTube.” 
Source: Indictment of Ralph Geissen for defamation, slander, and insult
Notification from anonymous Prosecutor that police chief Johan de Boer (ps) has joined as an injured party and demands €150 from Geissen for defamation.
Court session for Geissen regarding defamation, slander, and insult against Anita Frielink (ps) and Johan de Boer (ps) before judge mr. G.A. Bos. “According to Geissen, there is much more behind this case. Dozens of reports have been made, which are now being set aside. Geissen requests the police judge to obtain data from ABN-AMRO bank.
If this shows that Anita Frielink (ps) is right, then Geissen can be convicted. If she is wrong, they are corrupt and must leave the police.” The police judge denies the request to obtain data, as she does not see the necessity for retrieving this information.
Source: Court session
Chief Inspector Ewald Riks of the Justice and Security Inspectorate, the supervisor of the Zeist police, informs Geissen that he sees no reason to conduct an investigation based on his report, as the Inspectorate has found no signs of a structural problem in the investigation.
The Inspectorate announces that it will no longer respond to requests from Geissen in the future. However, the Inspectorate will take the information Geissen sent into account in a risk analysis, which forms the basis for an annual work program.
Source: Email Inspectorate JENV
Geissen blurred the face of team leader Tijn Keuss due to a strong request from YouTube. In the broadcast of Opsporing Verzocht, Keuss says: “So far, it seems that jealousy was involved because Narges was going to get married shortly afterwards and because Narges was leading a very happy life, and we are looking for the motive along those lines."
The media, however, suggests that Narges is a victim of honor revenge. A completely unjustified suggestion. There is simply no honor revenge involved. The family has nothing to do with it. The reason I emphasize this is because it is very unpleasant for the family members. It is just harsh that society looks at you this way, that the surroundings look at you this way. While you are deeply in your sorrow. So in that respect, you can rule out the possibility of honor revenge.” 
Brigadier MDNDR003 was allowed to conduct anonymous research in the defamation case of his colleague Anita Frielink (ps) against Geissen. It is easier to accuse an honest whistleblower in an honor revenge cover-up case of being mentally ill and stitching an ear on them when done anonymously.
The timeline of this brigadier is incomplete and full of lies, yet was later adopted 1:1 by judges in the convicting verdict because they believe the brigadier's false story and not Geissen's truthful account.
Source: Timeline of Brigadier MDNDR003
Brigadier Hans Hameeteman and his colleague Katherina Elisabeth Gerhardine Brouwer - Bakkenes from Zeist police are investigating suspect Geissen in the defamation case of their direct colleague Anita Frielink (ps). Hameeteman previously recorded the complaint from Geissen, which was later shelved by his superior.
According to Frielink, Mr. Geissen spreads large lies and insults about her." 
Source: Hans Hameeteman conducts investigation
Attorney General at the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Paul Frielink: "Ralph Geissen may have had feelings for Narges Achikzei, but that love was unrequited." The Supreme Court of the Netherlands has refused to respond substantively to the criticism from Geissen and his lawyer regarding the verdict of the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal, and refused to overturn the false conviction of the honest whistleblower.
Source: Supreme Court ruling in the false defamation case of Zeist police
A journalist claims that everyone in Zeist remembers Narges Achikzei as a victim of honor killing because she wanted to marry a man of her own choice and was brutally murdered by the sister of a friend of Haroen Mehraban just before her forced civil marriage.
