The intestines murder

A man who killed his girlfriend by pulling out her intestines through anus and vagina has his sentenced reduced from 13 to 12 years imprisonment. This seems a rather short sentence regarding the fact that in the case of the manslaugther that turned out to be suicide in Nuenen the innocent husband received 12 years as well, Harold R received 13 years for the so called 'car trunk murder' and Aldo G. received a life sentence for supposedly ordering the death of two Brazilian coke traffickers (the so called 'A12 murders'), even though there is no hard evidence linking him to the crime and the true criminal behind the crime and self confessed murderer of 24 people, Filipo Cerfeda only received 10 years (the main part of which he may serve at home. Similarly Louis Hageman was sentenced to life on questionable evidence for 2 murders

Ed Louwes deserves a retrial? He deserves freedom

In an evening filling broadcast, Dutch newsprogram 'Nova' presented the facts in the 'Deventer moord' (Deventer murder) in wich accountant Ed Louwes has been convicted. As had already been clear to most people, except the judicial system and Peter R de Vries, the evidence on which Ed Louwes has been convicted to a 12 year sentence, was very very shaky if not non-existent.

Lucia de B must be retried

Lucia de Berk, the dutch nurse convicted to life imprisonment for the allegated murder of a number of patients should be retried.

The so called Posthumus commission in its report of today stated that the entire case is fraud with tunnelvision from the DA's office. From the start they were convinced that Lucia de B was guilty and their entire evidence gathering was based on that. Any evidence pointing to her innocence was disregarded or discarded.

The commission was especially critical towards the statistical 'evidence' in the case as only 1 statistician calculated the chance that Lucia was 'not guilty' on 1 in 340.000.000 This calculation was not shared by other, more scientifically renowed statisticians, who calculated it at 1 in 40 or 1 in 8. The statistics never should have been allowed as evidence, the Posthumus commission stated in its report.
There were no murders

Self proclaimed crime-journalist de Vries gets kicked in the butt

Peter de Vries gets kicked in the butt by Steve Brown:

Prosecutors Schiedammer murder not prosecuted

Apparently the justice department is immune. It is a shame after they deliberately kept evidence that Cees B was NOT the purpetrator of a heineous crime, secret.
One prosecutor was even promoted on the basis of her 'success' in this case.

Suspicious behaviour of first husband Bottenberg

Bottenberg admitted trying to strangle his wife on earlier occasion

1. Ten Winkel, the wrongfully convicted second husband of Bebe Paña always stated he thought his wife had committed suicide. Prosecution and police always stated she was killed.
   It is therefore odd that no research was done into any other possible perpetrator than de defendant, such as Paña's first husband Hans Bottenberg. In fact, the Dutch Forensic Institute (NFI) never did any research -such as nail scrapings, hair, skin, semen or other DNA traces- that could point to any other suspect.
   The police was convinced Paña was killed and they decided they already knew 'whodunnit', before any proper investigation was made. Clearly a case of "we made up our minds, we do not want to be confused with the facts". However, the following facts should have made Bottenberg a serious suspect:
   

Convicted husband of Cebuana Bebe Paña not guilty, freed

Evidence did not exist

Mr. Spong: "Immediate release"

The husband of Bebe Paña ten Winkel from Badian, Cebu province, Philippines, is found not guilty by the Dutch Appelate Court in Den Bosch.
The dutchman was arrested januari 2005 on murder charges and was convicted in june 2006 to 12 years imprisonment for manslaughter of his wife Bebe Paña.
Ten Winkel however always maintained he was innocent and that in fact his severely depressed wife had committed suicide.

During the appeal on 21-23 march 2007, experts for the defence showed that the prior evidence on which ten Winkel was convicted, simply did not exist.

During the first trial in 2006, the ‘Expert’ for the prosecution -Dr. De Bakker from the 'Groene Hart Ziekenhuis' - hired by the State pathology lab (NFI-Netherlands Forensic Institute), had stated that a line, visible on a CT scan of the troath of Paña, was likely a fracture, and that he would not know what else had caused this but strangulation. This sealed the fate for ten Winkel in the 2006 trial.

Prof. Milroy: "No proof of strangulation"

On appeal, counter expertise from Dutch (Dr. de Bondt and Prof van Engelshoven) and Belgian (Prof. Jacobs) forensic experts as well as from a forensic pathologist from Scotland Yard (Prof Milroy) made clear that the line in the CT was no fracture at all but a normal finding -also in people alive- being a remnant of normal embryological development. In fact, Paña appeared to have this line on the other (left) side as well, which was missed by the state lab.

It must have been painfully embarrasing for the Dutch state forensic institute that the pathologist (Bela Kubat) who testified on the first day, had given the judges a completely different view of where this supposed fracture was present than the radiologist from the state (de Bakker, Groene Hart Hospital) who testified on the 2nd day did, suggesting a serious communication problem between the two. This was so blatant that it triggered the presiding judge to make a remark to that effect.

Confronted with these facts, De Bakker showed himself to be a sore looser, maybe because his wife was attending the proceedings and he did not want to look like a dumbass in front of her. At a certain moment, one of the judges even had to point out to him on the X-ray that there was no fracture. Bela Kubat in the mean time had lost her continous arrogance and just remained silent and trembling in her seat.

Dr. de Bakker: Incompetent ‘expert’?

'Supporting evidence' brought forward by the Prosecution, was dismissed by Scotland Yard expert Prof. Dr. Milroy as of no value. The state pathologist Dr. Kubat, then admitted it was more her 'personal theory'.

On the basis of the above, defense lawyer Mr. Gerard Spong asked for acquittal. He pointed out that never any motive was established by the prosecutor and that the marriage between ten Winkel and his wife had been a good one, as testified by the handwritten letter left by his wife.

With this counter expertise being overwhelmingly convincing, and even the prosecutor admitting there was no fracture (the sole evidence for ten Winkel's 2006 conviction), the 3 judges from the appellate court showed no hesitation in releasing ten Winkel 2 days after the trial, pending the verdict 2 weeks later on April 6.

In their verdict the appelate court stated that indeed there was no fracture, but even if there would have been a fracture - as presumed during the first trial- this would not be proof of any malice as it could have occured after death e.g. as a "mortician's fracture".

Kubat: "Eeeh, in fact it was only my personal theory"

Ten Winkel is reunited with the couples 6 year old son who he had not seen during his 2,5 years incarceration. In a letter, identified as from her hand, Bebe Paña apparently announced her suicide, she called ten Winkel a 'wonderful, wonderful husband', 'who loves me the way I am'. She however also referred to her severe depressions for which there was no cure and announced this would be the last time she would be heard of.
Ten Winkel is re-establishing contact with his in-laws in Cebu, some of whom even congratulated him on his release.
See also Suspicious behaviour of Bebe Pana's first husband on this site.

Update 13 April 2010: The Supreme Court has now ruled that ten Winkel is not guilty. This was not surprising as the prosecutor at the Suprem Court had advised as such.

Keywords: Bebe Paña, Nuenen, NFI, Scotland Yard, Milroy, Kubat, suicide, Badian, Spong, ten winkel, de Bondt, van Engelshoven, Bebe, Paña, Jacobs