Report for false official report about ‘secret key witness’ in mega case

- Advertisement -spot_imgspot_img

It strongly seems that the detectives in a mega case falsified official reports about an interrogation of a suspect. This is apparent, among other things, from an interrogation of this suspect Ivo J., in recent days with the commissioner of justice for the court in Leeuwarden. Lawyers have been saying for years that justice has made a secret deal with J. A lawyer filed a report with the top of the Public Prosecution Service on Thursday. Crimesite has seen that report. It concerns the Maggiore trial, about large-scale cocaine trade around Saied H., who is now suspected of being liquidated.

By means of @Wim van de Pol

According to lawyer Sanne Schuurman, part of the text of the recorded interrogation from 2015, in which Ivo J. speaks with a public prosecutor, has been omitted from the official reports. The aim was apparently – the lawyer thinks – to conceal from the court that impermissible promises were made to the witness by a public prosecutor during the conversation.

The appeal in the “Maggiore” case has been dragging on for years. For years there has been talk of an illegal crown witness deal with Ivo J. being concluded in the case. It was illegal because all kinds of promises were made to the witness without the court being informed. The recent statements by Ivo J. indicate that police officers – and perhaps a prosecutor – may have committed crimes.

Well cooperated

In August 2017, the court in Assen sentenced a group of suspects to hefty prison sentences for, among other things, membership of a criminal organization, cocaine trafficking and possession of firearms. Utrechter Saied H., as leader of the group, was sentenced to eight years in prison. Ivo J. had been his right-hand man between 2013 and 2015. He made 40 statements.

Ivo J. received “only” three years in prison, after a remarkably low sentence. The reason for this leniency was that he had cooperated well with the police, the Public Prosecution Service reported at the time.


When the appeal was going on, witness Ivo J. detonated a bomb in the program EenVandaag. In the program, correspondence showed that a deal had apparently been made, that there had been commitments, and that the Public Prosecution Service had not mentioned this to the court. Ivo J. was in fact a star witness without the court and the lawyers and the other suspects knowing this.

Despite the correspondence and suggestive apps, and after hearing the case prosecutor on appeal, the Public Prosecution Service continues to deny that any commitment has been made to Ivo J..

Finally, the Court of Appeal of Leeuwarden decided last autumn that the recordings of the interrogations of Ivo J. from 2015 must be listened to and Ivo J. was questioned again about the course of events.

One interrogation is missing

It has now become clear from the interrogations of Ivo J. that took place last week that one interrogation from 2015 was not verbalized in the official reports.

Because the order of the reports would no longer be correct, according to lawyer Schuurman, all interrogations were then provided with a different date and number and reprinted. Ivo J. then had to sign all those interrogations again, he says in his interrogation before the commissioner. The reason was, according to J.:

That it would raise questions. Of what has been said. That it didn’t go smoothly. The order was wrong, so it had to be redrawn, which had something to do with recordings, which could raise questions.

Lawyer Sanne Schuurman: ‘This results in two criminal offences: forgery and falsely drawing up official official reports by the relevant reporting officers, in conjunction.’

The interrogation was done by two detectives. The missing part of the interrogation was a conversation between a public prosecutor and suspect Ivo J.. The Public Prosecution Service had denied for years that there had been an interrogation of J. in which the public prosecutor had participated.


The investigation is supervised by the public prosecutor. The painful question that now arises is whether the public prosecutor in question knew about this. If so, he may have also committed forgery.

In any case, lawyer Schuurman says he has the strong impression that the public prosecutor, a public prosecutor from the national public prosecutor’s office and even a chief public prosecutor have worked together to conceal from the court and court that Ivo J. is a secret key witness been.

In March, the court will hear witnesses at public hearings on these allegations, among other things.

Who is Saied H.?

Saied H. has not appealed against his sentence of eight years in prison in Maggiore. There is still a confiscation case against H. in which the judiciary demands millions in criminal profits from him. At the moment, H. is stuck in a major investigation into liquidations. Together with Ahmet G., H. would have been preparing for, among other things, the (unimplemented) liquidation of Soester businessman Chris Kraijpoel and the now deceased Robin van O. (convicted of cocaine trafficking).

H. was acquitted in 2021 of involvement in a large stock of weapons found in 2019 in a garage box in Hoofddorp. He is also a suspect in a case about the export of cocaine to Sweden. Saied H. is of Iranian descent. He lived in Meppel and Utrecht and had close ties with a group of serious criminals from the Utrecht region.

- Advertisement -spot_imgspot_img
Latest news
- Advertisement -spot_img
Related news
- Advertisement -spot_img