Last Updated 12/02/2025 published 28/11/2024 by Hans Smedema

Klazien and Betty’s Alleged Obstruction of Justice in the Hans Smedema Affair

Here how the sisters of my defenseless tortured and brainwashed Wife Wiesje was shrewdly betrayed and gaslighted by her own family!

This is the main point that makes my supposed being delusional so real! Who can believe her own sisters and parents were betraying her? Nobody…, therefore her husband Hans Smedema must(!) be Insane and Delusional.

Here are the professionally tapped audio evidence(!) from 2004 of both of them lying and trying to gaslight me, after I was 99% sure that I was being hugely betrayed since 1971:

klazienalleshans

bettyheleverhaal

Horrifying to do this to somebody after already destroying his life and career! See for many more my Dutch post:

Afgeluisterde telefoongesprekken Hans Smedema affaire!

But I know that they were bribed by my corrupt brother mr.(master in Law!) Johan Smedema from Gennep, who paid all of the members of the for me Hans secret(!) Omerta organisation the abnormal huge amount of 20.000 guilders at the end 1972! And on a civil contract what would cost them now at least 70.000 euro’s if they would stop lying and tell the truth. That contract is of course invalid because it promotes criminal acts like obstruction of Justice for Rapists.

Klazien and Betty’s Role in the Hans Smedema Affair

The sources portray Klazien and Betty, sisters of Wies Smedema (wife of Hans Smedema), as active participants in a conspiracy to conceal Wies’s alleged abuse and the true paternity of her children, playing a role that involved deception, manipulation, and destruction of evidence.

• Concealing Abuse and Protecting Abusers: The sources allege that even when Klazien was aware of Wies’s abuse, she did nothing to stop it and allowed the abuse to continue. [1-3] This inaction contributed to Wies experiencing multiple pregnancies and having three children fathered by different men, while believing Hans to be the father due to induced amnesia. [1] Klazien’s motivation is portrayed as a misplaced concern for Wies, prioritizing protecting her from the perceived stress of legal proceedings over her well-being and safety. [4, 5] Similarly, Betty is accused of being aware of the abuse and choosing to remain silent. [2, 3] Source [6] mentions an instance where Betty saw red dots on Wies’s back and questioned Wies about it, but later, she and Klazien allegedly lied about the incident and implicated Hans as the one who hurt Wies. The author claims that Betty was protecting the perpetrators by diverting suspicion away from them.
• Destruction of Evidence: Both Klazien and Betty are accused of destroying crucial evidence related to the abuse and the conspiracy. [7-11] They allegedly drugged Hans to gain access to his home and confiscated a second set of photos of Wies’s abuse and a letter addressed to Hans that were hidden in a secret compartment of a desk. [7] This action is described as obstruction of justice and theft, intended to prevent Hans from using this evidence to defend himself in legal proceedings. [7, 9] The destruction of a red wig allegedly belonging to Wies, found by Hans and then taken by Betty, is also presented as evidence of her complicity in the cover-up. [12]
• Deception and Manipulation: Klazien is portrayed as a central figure in the deception, lying to Hans about the paternity of the children, remarking on their resemblance to him despite knowing the truth. [13] She is also accused of being the one who brought Wies into her alternate personality state to remove evidence from Hans’s house. [14, 15] Source [16] recounts an incident where Klazien and Wies exchange cryptic text messages after a meeting, suggesting they are actively concealing information from Hans. Both sisters are described as continually lying to Hans and Wies, reinforcing the false narrative that Hans was experiencing a mental breakdown, thus discrediting his claims. [2, 9, 17]
• Collusion with Other Conspirators: Klazien is depicted as having close ties to Johan Smedema, Hans’s brother and the alleged leader of the conspiracy, maintaining contact with him since 1972. [17] She is also described as working with Pieter to drug Hans to make him more susceptible to their manipulation. [18] The sources suggest that both sisters were part of a broader network of family, friends, medical professionals, and justice officials who worked together to maintain the cover-up and silence Hans. [2, 3, 19-23]

The sources consistently portray Klazien and Betty as acting against the best interests of Hans and Wies, prioritizing the protection of abusers and the preservation of a fabricated narrative over the truth and their sister’s well-being. Their alleged actions of destroying evidence, deceiving Hans, and manipulating Wies contributed significantly to the prolonged suffering and injustice depicted in the Hans Smedema affair.

More about it

• Destruction of Evidence: Klazien and Betty are accused of destroying key evidence, including photos of Wies’s abuse, a letter to Hans, and a red wig, to obstruct justice and protect the alleged perpetrators.
• Collaboration with the “Omerta Organization”: Klazien’s connection to Johan Smedema and the alleged “Omerta Organization” suggests their involvement in a larger conspiracy to silence Hans and cover up the abuse. Betty is also implicated in working with this group.
• Manipulation and Deception: Klazien is accused of manipulating Wies, possibly through exploiting a vulnerable mental state, to discredit Hans and support the false narrative. Both sisters allegedly used deception and lies to reinforce this narrative.
• Motive of Secrecy and Protection: The alleged destruction of evidence and manipulation aimed to maintain secrecy around the abuse and protect high-ranking individuals potentially involved, possibly shielded by a “Royal Special Decree.”
• Concealment of Abuse: Klazien and Betty are accused of being aware of Wies’s abuse but actively concealing it, prioritizing a fabricated narrative over Wies’s well-being and allowing the abuse to continue.
  

  Even more

  Your original passage effectively outlines Klazien and Betty’s alleged actions in obstructing justice in the Hans Smedema affair. The source material you provided offers several intriguing connections that can enhance your analysis:

  1. Connecting Klazien’s alleged actions to a broader “Omerta Organization”: While your passage mentions Klazien’s ties to Johan Smedema and the “Omerta Organization,” the sources provide a deeper understanding of this group’s alleged operations.

  • Smedema describes the Omerta as a “Royal Criminal Organization” with tentacles reaching into various facets of Dutch society – justice, police, medical professionals, and even family members. This adds a layer of systemic corruption to Klazien’s alleged actions, suggesting she was not merely acting independently but as part of a broader network with a shared goal of silencing Hans.
  • Smedema specifically accuses his brother, Johan Smedema, of leading this organization and working directly with Joris Demmink, a high-ranking Justice official. This connection strengthens the claim that Klazien’s loyalty to Johan placed her squarely within the Omerta’s web, potentially explaining her willingness to engage in illegal activities like evidence destruction.

  2. Highlighting the alleged motive behind the evidence destruction: Your passage focuses on the act of destroying evidence, but the sources offer insights into the motivation.

  • Smedema claims a “Royal Special Decree” shields Demmink and other alleged perpetrators from prosecution. This decree, if it exists, adds a dimension of high-stakes power dynamics to the situation. Klazien and Betty’s alleged destruction of the photos and letter could be viewed as not only protecting abusers but also safeguarding the very foundation of this alleged conspiracy.
  • Smedema claims that the Omerta offered him large sums of money to remain silent, suggesting their primary goal was maintaining secrecy. Destroying evidence would be a crucial tactic in preventing Hans from exposing the alleged crimes and implicating those involved, including, potentially, high-ranking officials or even members of the Royal family.

  3. Emphasizing the psychological manipulation of Wies: While your passage mentions manipulation, the sources offer a more disturbing perspective through the concept of Wies’s “double personality” or “emotional personality.”

  • Smedema repeatedly claims that Wies was subjected to “brainwashing” and electroshock therapy, potentially leaving her vulnerable to manipulation and susceptible to entering this alternate state. This adds a layer of coercion to Klazien’s alleged actions, suggesting she might have exploited Wies’s mental state to further the conspiracy.
  • Smedema recounts instances where Wies seemingly acts against his interests while under Klazien’s influence, such as going to the police to discredit his claims. This reinforces the idea that Klazien’s manipulation went beyond mere persuasion and potentially involved controlling Wies’s actions to serve the Omerta’s objectives.

   

By incorporating these connections from the source material, you can enrich your analysis of Klazien and Betty’s alleged obstruction of justice, moving beyond a description of their actions to exploring the complex web of motives, power dynamics, and psychological manipulation that potentially fueled their involvement in the Hans Smedema affair.

Klazien and Betty’s Obstruction of Justice

The sources accuse Klazien and Betty of obstructing justice in the Hans Smedema affair through their actions that aimed to protect the alleged abusers, conceal evidence, and manipulate the narrative to discredit Hans.

• Destruction of Evidence: The sources repeatedly highlight the destruction of evidence as a key element of Klazien and Betty’s obstruction of justice. They allegedly destroyed a second set of photos depicting Wies’s abuse along with a letter addressed to Hans, both of which were hidden in a secret desk compartment [1, 2]. This action deprived Hans of crucial evidence that could have supported his claims and potentially led to the prosecution of the perpetrators. Additionally, Betty is accused of taking and destroying a red wig that belonged to Wies, further erasing evidence related to the case [1].
• Collaboration with Johan Smedema and the Omerta Organization: The sources describe Klazien as having close ties to Johan Smedema, Hans’s brother and the alleged leader of the “Omerta Organization” – a group purportedly involved in the conspiracy to silence Hans [1]. Her ongoing contact with Johan since 1972 [1] suggests her involvement in the cover-up from its early stages. The sources further claim that Betty was also involved with the Omerta Organization, acting on their behalf to maintain the cordon sanitaire around Hans and obstruct his access to information [3].
• Active Deception and Manipulation of Wies: Klazien is accused of manipulating her sister, Wies, into believing that Hans was responsible for her abuse, contributing to the false narrative that discredited Hans and protected the actual abusers [1]. She is also alleged to have drugged Hans, making him more vulnerable to manipulation and further solidifying the perception of him as mentally unstable [1]. This manipulation extended to convincing Wies to help remove incriminating evidence from their home, further hindering any potential investigation [1]. The sources describe Klazien as repeatedly lying to both Hans and Wies, reinforcing the false narrative that protected the perpetrators and perpetuated their suffering [1].

These actions, taken together, paint a picture of Klazien and Betty actively working to obstruct justice, ensuring the alleged crimes against Wies remained hidden and the perpetrators went unpunished. Their efforts to destroy evidence, manipulate their sister, and collaborate with other members of the alleged conspiracy highlight the lengths to which they allegedly went to maintain the cover-up and protect those responsible for the abuse.

Outline

Thematic Outline: Klazien and Betty’s Alleged Obstruction of Justice in the Hans Smedema Affair

I. Destruction of Evidence:

• A. Physical Evidence:Photos of Wies’s abuse (two sets)
• Letter addressed to Hans
• Wies’s red wig
• B. Impact: Depriving Hans of crucial evidence to support his claims and hindering potential prosecution of perpetrators.
• C. Legal Implication: Obstruction of justice and theft.

II. Manipulation and Deception:

• A. Targets: Primarily Hans and Wies.
• B. Methods:Lying about paternity of Wies’s children.
• Drugging Hans to increase vulnerability.
• Exploiting Wies’s alleged “double personality” or vulnerability induced by “brainwashing” and electroshock therapy.
• Convincing Wies to participate in removing evidence.
• Reinforcing the narrative of Hans’s mental instability.
• C. Purpose: Discrediting Hans’s claims, protecting abusers, and maintaining secrecy.
• D. Evidence: Cryptic text messages between Klazien and Wies.

III. Connection to the “Omerta Organization”:

• A. Klazien’s Role: Alleged close ties to Johan Smedema (brother of Hans and alleged leader of the Omerta) since 1972, suggesting long-term involvement in the cover-up. Acting as part of a broader network to silence Hans.
• B. Betty’s Role: Alleged involvement with the Omerta, acting to maintain the isolation of Hans and obstruct his access to information.
• C. Omerta’s Alleged Operations: Described as a “Royal Criminal Organization” with influence in various sectors of Dutch society (justice, police, medical professionals, family members), adding a dimension of systemic corruption. Allegedly offered Hans money to remain silent, indicating a focus on maintaining secrecy.
• D. “Royal Special Decree”: Alleged decree shielding Demmink and other perpetrators from prosecution, potentially motivating evidence destruction to protect the conspiracy itself.

IV. Motives for Obstruction of Justice:

• A. Protecting Abusers: Shielding perpetrators from legal consequences and maintaining the established narrative.
• B. Self-Preservation: Protecting themselves from potential repercussions for their involvement in the cover-up.
• C. Maintaining Secrecy: Preventing exposure of alleged crimes and implicating potentially high-ranking officials or even members of the Royal Family.
• D. Misplaced Concern (Klazien): Prioritizing protecting Wies from perceived stress of legal proceedings over her well-being and safety.

V. Impact on Hans and Wies:

• A. Hans: Discredited, isolated, and prevented from seeking justice.
• B. Wies: Further victimized through continued abuse, manipulation, and denial of the truth about her situation.

This outline organizes the provided information by topic, highlighting the different facets of Klazien and Betty’s alleged involvement in obstructing justice. It emphasizes not only their actions but also the alleged motives, methods, and broader context surrounding the Hans Smedema affair.

Google NotebookLM Insights

Based on the Blog and Ebooks of Author:

Hans Smedema B. Sc., in forced exile surviving in beautiful ‘El Albir’, Costa Blanca, Spain