The lawyers of the three suspects in the Marumer swimming pool murder of Jan Elzinga in 2012 don’t give a damn about the ‘blatantly lying’ crown witness Willem P. ,,This man has defrauded the Public Prosecution Service with falsified text messages, he has informed the examining magistrate. had been defrauded, he initially stayed away from this trial because it was getting too hot for him and when he finally showed up, he lied as hard as he could during the interrogation earlier this week,” said Wilko ten Have, the lawyer for Monique H. “This is a disgrace to the rule of law.”
Thanks to the crown witness Willem P (who was sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2013 for organizing the murder), Monique H, Elzinga’s partner at the time, has been incarcerated for over a year. Together with her brother Marcel H from Nieuw-Roden and their mother Coby van der L. from Nieuw-Roden, she is suspected of having provoked the murder. The Public Prosecution Service (OM) demands prison terms of up to 20 years against the three.
As reported, during the eight-day marathon process, questions have been raised about the reliability of the crown witness in recent weeks. He forged text messages and initially stayed away from the witness hearing that was supposed to start the trial.
It was only after almost two weeks that the key witness reported. “He was able to read all the messages about the process and adjust his statement earlier this week,” said Ten Have. The defense shot numerous holes in the stories that the key witness told during the interrogation on Monday, in which he again pointed the accusing finger at Elzinga’s in-laws.
The defense of the suspects was not only critical of the crown witness. The Public Prosecution Service also got a kick out of it. Earlier, the court ruled that the Public Prosecution Service had conducted a ‘very careless’ investigation. Ten Have: ,,There has been serious procedural defects, as a result of which my client has not had a fair trial. The falsified text messages have been negligently investigated, careless administration has been carried out and crucial documents have been lost. A crucial witness hearing has been erased, there are inaccuracies in the police reports and my client has been put under too much pressure during an interrogation.”
Christian Visser, lawyer for Marcel H, thinks it is very strange that the key witness was believed when he arrived with what later turned out to be falsified text messages. “Isn’t it completely unlikely that a key witness known as manipulative would arrive with an incredible piece of evidence and that there would not be a very thorough investigation into that text conversation?”
Visser questions the integrity of the police in this investigation. “I am convinced that the police knew that the key witness was lying. I am really convinced of that.”
Visser argues that the court was misled by the key witness and that the case in the swimming pool murder should be declared inadmissible. If the Public Prosecution Service can peddled a lying key witness, then the course of justice is at risk.”
He told the court that they can do something in this case that has never happened in the Netherlands. “You can follow the Public Prosecution Service, which has teamed up with a lying key witness who also committed perjury.”