Friday, December 09, 2011

Two forced prostitutes on De Wallen

Main

Now some new verdicts from rechtspraak.nl, with the LJN-numbers: BO9639 and BO7662. You can find them here:

http://www.rechtspraak.nl/ljn.asp?ljn=BO9639
http://www.rechtspraak.nl/ljn.asp?ljn=BO7662

The verdicts are related to two different young women who are forced to work in window prostitution. The two pimps who are described in these two verdicts seem to belong to the same family, but I'm not so sure. Actually, I initially believed that both stories were related to the same woman, they both had an abortion and they both wanted to keep a baby. But after closing inspection they definitely are different persons.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but one of the stories is very similar to a story told by a woman in a book written by Maria Genova (see this post on my blog: Women for sale, BTW: it seems this woman is actually Sweetmizzy who wrote extensively about the case on her website. Chris Sent also writes about her on her blog in this blog post: Een prostituee kan niet de moeder van mijn kind zijn). This woman also had a late abortion, this time in Morocco, and she kept the baby of a later pregnancy. This child is heavily mentally retarded. If I'm correct, then judging from the story of this woman in the book written by Maria Genova, it seems that this pimp and his family even made Saban B scared. Also, this gang wasn't known to me. They also seem to have nothing to do with the so-called Judo case, or the Maas case. And after reading all these human trafficking stories related to De Wallen in Amsterdam, I must conclude that Saban B definitely wasn't the boss on De Wallen. (BTW: I found out as of October 14, 2013 that none of the women described in these two verdicts are Sweet Mizzy. But the pimps did belong to the same group as Sweet Mizzy's pimp. The verdict concerning Sweet Mizzy has also been published, but it is very short, and hardly contains information. UPDATE AGAIN!!!: I found out as of January 23, 2014 that actually one of these women is actually Sweet Mizzy. It is: BO7662)

And here some translated bits from LJN BO7662 (I have to remark that this file speaks both in the third and first person in a very messy way):

On September 28, 2008 information came in at the Regionale Criminele Inlichtingen Eenheid (RCIE) of politie Flevoland that [fellow suspect 1] let a woman, named [person 1], work as a whore and that this [person 1] hands over the earned money to [fellow suspect 1]. That information is supplemented since February 19, 2009 with information that also [fellow suspect 2] lets women work in prostitution for him. In June 2009 it is reported to RCIE that [person 2] lived with [fellow suspect 2] and his wife [person 3] and that [person 2] plays whore for years for [fellow suspect 2].

(comment by Donkey: I skip a bit here)

From further research it emerges that [.] [victim 1] is possibly a victim of human trafficking. It turns out that she maintained contact with the suspect. She had an exploratory interview with the police and later she pressed charges against the suspect.

(comment by Donkey: I skip a bit here)

The court considers it to be lawfully and convincingly proven that the suspect made himself guilty of human trafficking as far as [victim 1] is concerned with this and that he has laundered amounts of money that originated from this human trafficking. The court finds support in the following means of evidence.

The testimony/testimonies of [.] [victim 1], where she presses charges against the suspect. On January 25, 2010 she testifies as follows. She has had a problematic childhood, among other things as a result of the fact that her parents were divorced, her mother was an alcoholic and she couldn't get along with her stepfather. She got depressed and had been admitted for six weeks into the psychiatric PAAZ department in Lelystad. When she was 18 years old, in 1997, she entered into a problematic relationship. When she ended this relationship in 2001 and her ex stalked her, she was helped by the suspect. Among other things, he jumped in between when that ex came towards her with a stone.
When [victim 1] told the suspect about her debts he said that he did know a solution for that. She could go in prostitution in [place]; the suspect would coach her and protect her. He wanted to have a percentage of between twenty and thirty percent of the earnings for doing that. [Victim 1] found this reasonable.
The week after this, the suspect, [victim 1] and [fellow suspect 2] went to [place] (comment by Donkey: obviously this is Amsterdam). The suspect showed her where she could work, on the [address] at [person 4], a private window letter. The family [suspect] knew this man and arranged the rooms there. After the tour, [victim 1] said that the appointment could continue. Subsequently a set of underwear was bought in a sex shop with the suspect. That evening [victim 1] and the suspect went to bed with each other for the first time. From that moment on they really were a couple and they were inseparable. [Victim 1] went working for the first time on De Wallen in May or June 2001. She was brought by [fellow suspect 2] and the suspect. The suspect gave instructions. While she worked, [fellow suspect 2] and he regularly walked passed the window. The suspect collected the earned money after every two or three clients.
In the interrogation of February 5, 2010 [victim 1] tells among other things that the suspect's word is law. The first five or six months of the relationship, it was a pleasant time. After this, he began to humiliate her. He said that [person 1] earned a lot more than she did and that he felt ashamed that he had to go to [country] with such a low amount of money. In the beginning she worked six days a week, even when she was menstruating. In the summer of 2002 she was kicked by the suspect with full force in her chest, which had the result that she could get no air anymore. She went to the police, but it was advised to her not to press charges. For the suspect, [victim 1] tells, it wasn't always necessary to beat her. "The expressions on the face of [suspect] and his body language, this intimidating posture and the fact how the family [suspect] was known, was enough for me."

In the interrogation of February 8, 2010 [victim 1] testifies about the [car] which was bought in 2002 with the money that she earned in prostitution and that the suspect went with [person 5] with this (car) to [country] for four weeks at her expenses. She also tells about an incident in [country 2] where the suspect threatens her, her mother and sister with death.

In the interrogation of February 12, 2010 [victim 1] testifies about the [car] which the suspect bought in 2002 with the money that she earned in prostitution, to go on vacation with his family in [country]. The complainant calculates that she should have earned as much as €50,000 per year. She finds this unrealistic because she hasn't seen anything of it herself. Cars, expensive clothing of Prada, Versace and Dolce & Garbana , fuel, [country], you name it, were bought with her money. Also money was sent to [country] to his mother. [Victim 1] made nothing out of the earned money. Her clothes came from the market.

In the interrogation of February 19, 2010 [victim 1] testifies that in 2004 she was forced by the suspect and this family to have an abortion. Immediately after this, she had to work in prostitution again, since there had to be income.

In the interrogation of February 23, 2010 [victim 1] testifies that the suspect made her believe that when I could arrange a trip to [country] for him and a [car] and a good house, they would have a child together. She wanted to fulfil this dream and starting from March 20, 2004 until October 2006 she began to work very hard. The suspect continued to take all money, every now and then she hid small amounts of money. She also worked when she was ill. It was never enough. In April or May 2005 the suspect bought a [car] with the prostitution money. In 2006 [victim 1] got pregnant again. The suspect wasn't happy with this, but [victim 1] decided that she wanted to have this baby at all costs.

In the testimony of April 2, 2010 [victim 1] says (summarised): "(..) I was so in love with that man that I wanted to give away my body for little money. (…) I couldn't get out. That was caused by the threats and the constant begging of the family to [suspect] for money."

As a witness during the hearing of September 28, 2010, [victim 1] has testified corresponding to what precedes. During that occasion, she furthermore testified that she had a couple of good girlfriends, but that the suspect didn't trust these girlfriends. These friendships have been broken off. [Victim 1] and the suspect didn't have contact for three years with the mother of [victim 1]. The suspect preferred a girl that had less contact with her parents, says [victim 1].

(Comment by Donkey: I skip a bit here)

Supporting evidence is found by the court in the following.

The statement of [witness 1] that she made on February 18, 2010 to the police, in which she testifies that [.] [victim 1] had a relationship with [suspect] and ended up behind the window. She simply had to work by order of [suspect]; she was put behind the window by [suspect] and has seen nothing of the money. The boys [of the family of the suspect] decided what was done with the money. The [of the family of the suspect]'s were all in the neighbourhood. [Suspect] was also there at that time. [Victim 1] and [suspect] drove along with [fellow suspect 1] or [fellow suspect 2]. The [of the family of the suspect]'s were in the pub opposite the windows (comment by Donkey: I immediately think about the Molensteeg, but I could be wrong). We were vulnerable and we were fooled. We were manipulated by the [of the family of the suspect]'s. We were worthless and just whores. They hit us with words, that wasn't always necessary with beatings.

The testimony of [witness 2], the mother of [.] [victim 1], in which she testifies that [victim 1] entered into a relationship with [suspect], that his brothers regularly sat on a little bench in front of the house and that she wasn't allowed to come in; a pie had to be eaten outside. [Witness 2] testifies that she regularly saw bruises on the body of [victim 1], on the arm, leg and face. This is what she told me, at the moment she was safe. She also understood that [victim 1] was afraid. When she confronted the suspect with that, he said that he had to do that by order of his brothers. She furthermore testifies that [victim 1] was repeatedly kicked on the station of Utrecht and that [victim 1] went to a blijf-van-mijn-lijf-huis (comment by Donkey: that is a shelter for women who suffer from male violence, a stay-off-my-body-house). [Witness 2] also testifies that she and her daughters [witness 3] and [victim 1] were threatened with death by the suspect during a vacation in [country 2].
That threat is confirmed by [witness 3].

[Witness 4] testifies that she got to know [victim 1] in 2004, that she worked in prostitution in [place] just like herself and that [victim 1] sometimes worked 7 days per week. She has also testified that [victim 1] was maltreated by her boyfriend and that she also saw bruises on the body of [victim 1]. Anyway, her boyfriend completely wrecked her psychologically. She derives from telephone conversations between [victim 1] and [suspect] that [suspect] picked her, [victim 1], up from her work. More often she has heard conversations of [victim 1] and her boyfriend. [Victim 1] was always crying during such moments. There was a lot of stress. He made her paranoid by letting her do the work.

(Comment by Donkey: I now switch to LJN BO9639)

On September 28, 2008 information came in at the Regionale Criminele Inlichtingen Eenheid (RCIE) of politie Flevoland that [fellow suspect 1] let a woman, named [victim 3], work as a whore and that this [victim 3] hands over the earned money to [fellow suspect 1]. That information is supplemented since February 19, 2009 with information that also [suspect] lets women work in prostitution for him. In June 2009 it is reported to RCIE that [victim 1] lived with [suspect] and his wife [person 1] and that [victim 1] plays whore for years for [suspect]. Information from July 2009 indicates that on December 5, 2008 the mother of [fellow suspect 1] and the suspect have deposited €8000 at the GWK, that this mother manages this money and that money is brought to [land] and put on a bank.

(comment by Donkey: I skip a bit here)

The court considers it to be lawfully and convincingly proven that the suspect made himself guilty of human trafficking as far as [victim 1] is concerned with this and that he has laundered amounts of money that originated from this human trafficking. The court finds support in the following means of evidence.

The testimony of [victim 1], made during the session of the court of September 28, 2010. She testifies that in the period starting from 2003 until and including 2007 she has been active in prostitution and that she did that to earn some extra money, that she has lived for a short while with the suspect and his wife, that sometimes - regarding her activities - she was brought by the suspect to [place 1] (comment by Donkey: that must be Amsterdam obviously) and that she has two tattoos with the name [suspect]. It is correct that she has lost her child.

The testimony of [victim 1], made to the police on December 16, 2009, in which she says: "You cannot protect me. I cannot give names. You arrest people and they are outside again after six months. It is my choice. I have to live with this."

The testimony of [victim 2], made to the police on December 24, 2009, in which she testifies that she has seen that [victim 1] worked as a prostitute for [suspect] on De Wallen in [place 1] and that [victim 1] had a tattoo with the name [suspect] on her arm.

The testimony of [victim 2] made to the police on March 18, 2010, in which she testifies that [victim 1] and [suspect] were always together, also on De Wallen, that [victim 1] had bruises, that she had told that [suspect] had beaten her and that [victim 1] had to have an abortion in 2008 in [country] because she was in a considerably late stage. She also testifies that [victim 1] had a broken arm in 2005, while initially she didn't go to the hospital with it. [Victim 2] found [victim 1] very slavish. [Suspect] introduced her to his wife [person 1] as follows: "this is [victim 1], [victim 1] is my whore."
[Suspect] always had thick bundles of cash at his disposal. He also bought cars. [Victim 2] has never seen [victim 1] with money. She bought her clothes on the market.

The testimony of [witness], made to the police on September 25, 2009, in which she testifies that [victim 1] (named [.] by the witness) lives with her brother [suspect] and his wife, that [victim 1] works as a prostitute for her brother in [place 1], that she has seen that [victim 1] was beaten with a TV-cable by [suspect] and that [victim 1] and his wife are beaten by [suspect] if they don't do what [suspect] says.

The testimony of [witness], made to the police on October 28, 2009, in which she testifies that she has heard that [victim 1] received beatings from [suspect] and that he beat her up in his room, that [victim 1] is crazy about [suspect], that [victim 1] had to hand over the money to [suspect] and that the money goes to the bank in [country].

The testimony of [witness 2], made to the police on February 18, 2010, in which she testifies that [victim 1] entered into a relationship with [suspect], that [victim 1] sat behind the window after she had just become 18 years old and that [victim 1] wasn't allowed by [suspect] to talk to anybody. She further testifies that she knows that [victim 1] gave the money to [suspect] and that she was his possession. [Witness 2] also indicates that she and the other girlfriends of the [the family of suspect] weren't working voluntarily in prostitution, but they had to. They just all had to hand over their money. [Suspect] and [fellow suspect 1] didn't give a shit about anything and decided everything about the money. Their girlfriends didn't have more life than working and sitting on the couch at home. [Victim 1] really did have nothing for herself. Everything went to the [the family of suspect].

The testimony of [witness 3], made to the police on January 8, 2010, in which he testifies that [suspect] has [victim 1] working for him for already five or six years in [place 1] on De Wallen and that he has seen [victim 1] working sometimes. He knows for sure that the women who stand behind the windows don't do this voluntarily and that they are often beaten up terribly.

The wiretapped telephone conversation performed by the police on January 10, 2010 between [victim 1] and her mother [mother of victim 1], in which [victim 1], after her mother had told her that she, [victim 1], if she wanted to step out of it she had to go to the police, says to her mother:
"Yes mom, say it to the police? What a mistake, do you watch TV sometimes? Then you should pay attention sometime, because they don't do an ass about it. If I would have been so sure about that, I would have given that name a long time ago. I have seen enough girls who pressed charges. I have seen enough boys being arrested who stood on the pavement again after six months. I have heard enough boys, whom they arrested, whom they just let escape. […..] I'm with my nose right in the middle of this and when I see these sort of things happen, do you really think that I would do something like that? Well, rather not. Then I would rather keep on fighting for a short while. […...] Mom, the police can do absolutely nothing about it, that's the whole joke of it all."

The testimony of [mother of victim 1], mother of [victim 1], made to the police on August 11, 2009, in which she testifies, that she knows that [victim 1] is maltreated by [suspect] and that she has often seen that [victim 1] had bruises. [Victim 1] has told her mother that she was beaten by [suspect], but that it was her own fault. It was noteworthy that [victim 1] always had a firm grip on her telephone when she came to her. [Victim 1] was supervised by [suspect]. [Victim 1] wants to have nothing to do with the police. When she is away from the [the family of suspect] she wants to say nothing out of fear.
[Victim 1] was a problematic child at home. It was difficult to keep her in line.

On January 19, 2010 [mother of victim 1] tells that [victim 1] was pregnant, in a considerably late stadium, that she was very emotional and that [suspect] shouldn't know it, because otherwise he would lock her up.

A report of a hearing of the tax department at the day of April 23, 2009, where [victim 1] was present as a party concerned. The tax department concluded that the party concerned, [victim 1], was active in prostitution in the period April 1, 2004 until and including September 30, 2007. [Victim 1] had to hand over her earnings from prostitution activities to a loverboy and/or pimp. Out of fear for him and to prevent acts of retaliation by him she doesn't want to name his name. [Victim 1] has said during the hearing that she didn't earn money with her activities, because she had to hand over all earnings directly to her loverboy.

The testimony of [witness 5], sister of [victim 1], who testifies the following. [Victim 1] has been removed from home in the past. There were problems at school and at home. [Victim 1] has been on a special school for a while (comment by Donkey: a special school is usually for children with certain problems). [Victim 1] told her that she couldn't go away from [suspect]. He would go after her anyway. She indicated that she wasn't happy but she saw no way out. [Suspect] has once said to [witness 5] that he could let [victim 1] do everything with the wanted. He made clear that [victim 1] was his. [Victim 1] also had never much money to spend.

No comments: