Please Share! Fight this 'Perfect' 40+ year (Royal) Crime!

Zijlstra Family Testimony and the 2009 Asylum Case

Main text independent evidence!

During your 2009 asylum request in Miami, Florida, Judge Rex J. Ford ordered a thorough investigation by the FBI and CIA into the claims you made [1-6]. Part of this investigation involved contacting individuals you mentioned in your accounts, seeking external validation [5, 7]. As a part of this investigation, Judge Ford requested your neighbor, Surgeon Ronald Zijlstra, and his two daughters, Sophie and Floor, to visit you in detention at Broward Transitional Center (BTC) [8]. They traveled to Miami and gave signed statements to Judge Ford [8].

At the time, Zijlstra’s wife was terminally ill and required a wheelchair [8]. As a reward for the family’s cooperation and assistance in the investigation, Judge Ford arranged for a special police escort to provide them priority access to events at Orlando Disney [8].

While the source material does not disclose the exact content of the statements provided by Sophie, Floor, and their father, their willingness to travel to Miami and sign declarations indicates their testimony was considered valuable to the investigation. They had firsthand knowledge of you and events that occurred while you were their neighbor.

Sophie had a romantic relationship with Jaap Duijs prior to his relationship with the woman who allegedly stole your medical records from you in 2014 [9, 10]. Sophie’s testimony, and that of her father, could have corroborated your allegations regarding Duijs’s activities, the existence of a listening device in your home, or the concealment of medical records.

To better understand the Zijlstra family’s contribution to Judge Ford’s investigation, a potential next step could be to request specific information regarding their statements from Judge Ford, or the Department of Justice. This might provide details on what evidence they offered and what impact their testimony had on the overall assessment of your asylum claim.

Duijs’s Abuse of Sophie Zijlstra

Jaap Duijs’s actions, as depicted in Hans Smedema’s accounts, had a profoundly negative and damaging impact on Sophie Zijlstra, affecting her emotionally, psychologically, and potentially even physically. It’s important to note that these are Smedema’s allegations, and the provided sources do not offer independent corroboration.

Sexual Abuse and Exploitation:

Smedema accuses Duijs of sexually abusing Sophie, including drugging her with Rohypnol (“roofies”) to make her more compliant [1-5]. He claims Duijs exploited Sophie’s infatuation with Smedema, manipulating her into a sexual relationship when Smedema himself, due to his own psychological struggles and the complexities of the situation, did not reciprocate Sophie’s advances [2, 6-9]. Duijs’s actions are described as predatory, taking advantage of a young and emotionally vulnerable girl [2, 3, 10]. Smedema alleges that Duijs even bragged about his sexual relationship with Sophie [9, 11], further highlighting his callous disregard for her well-being.

Manipulation and Mind Control:

Smedema’s account suggests that Duijs’s influence on Sophie extended beyond sexual abuse to include manipulation and mind control, mirroring his alleged control over Smedema’s wife, Wies [2, 3]. Duijs allegedly used his knowledge of the ongoing situation, gained through illegal surveillance of Smedema’s home, to manipulate Sophie’s feelings and decisions [12, 13]. This manipulation is depicted as a deliberate tactic to isolate Smedema further and maintain control over the narrative. Smedema suggests that Duijs conditioned Sophie to lie about their relationship to her parents and others [11], reinforcing his control and preventing exposure of his actions.

Near-Drowning Incident:

Smedema describes a harrowing incident where Sophie nearly drowned as a direct result of Duijs’s actions [1, 14, 15]. He alleges that Duijs forced Sophie to swim across a canal, rather than seek help from nearby residents, to avoid revealing their illicit relationship. This incident, resulting in Sophie’s hypothermia and near-death experience, underscores the dangerous consequences of Duijs’s manipulation and control. Smedema believes this traumatic event deeply impacted Sophie, though the extent of the psychological and physical ramifications remains unclear in the provided sources.

Prostitution and Exploitation by Others:

Smedema’s account indicates that Duijs may have facilitated Sophie’s involvement in prostitution [16]. He claims Duijs instructed Sophie to have sex with the harbormaster to prevent him from reporting their activities [16]. This allegation, if true, suggests Duijs exploited Sophie for his own protection, using her as a pawn to silence potential witnesses. Smedema also alludes to Sophie having sexual relationships with others, possibly for academic favors, although the details remain vague [16]. These allegations paint a picture of Sophie being increasingly vulnerable and exploited as a consequence of Duijs’s initial manipulation.

Long-Term Psychological Impact:

The cumulative effect of Duijs’s actions, according to Smedema, had a lasting psychological impact on Sophie. He describes her as distraught and struggling to come to terms with her experiences [17, 18]. While the specific nature of the long-term psychological consequences is not detailed, Smedema’s account suggests a significant disruption to Sophie’s emotional and psychological well-being, a direct result of Duijs’s abuse and manipulation.

A possible next step is to analyze Smedema’s own emotional state and mental health throughout these events. His accounts reveal a complex interplay of trauma, memory suppression, and psychological manipulation. Exploring his own psychological state could provide further context for his interactions with Sophie and offer insights into the dynamics of the alleged manipulation and abuse. This analysis could also delve deeper into the potential influence of others, such as Joris Demmink and Johan Smedema, on Smedema’s perception and interpretation of the events involving Sophie.

The Zijlstra Near-Drowning and Smedema’s Conspiracy Allegations

The intersection of Sophie Zijlstra’s near-drowning and Rinske (Rin) Smedema’s involvement in her brother Hans’s ordeal reveals a complex interplay of alleged manipulation, cover-up, and ultimately, a potential turning point in exposing the truth.

Sophie’s near-drowning:

According to Smedema, Sophie Zijlstra, the daughter of his neighbors, was drugged by Jaap Duijs and subsequently nearly drowned in a canal [1, 2]. This incident, attributed to Duijs’s attempt to conceal his sexual abuse of Sophie, inadvertently led to the involvement of Smedema’s sister, Rin, and her husband, Tjitte de Jong [3-7]. Smedema claims Duijs forced Sophie to swim across the canal rather than walk a short distance to Oudega to call her parents, as he feared discovery of his actions [2]. Exhausted and hypothermic, Sophie nearly drowned but was ultimately resuscitated by Duijs [1, 2, 8]. This near-drowning is portrayed as a pivotal moment, as it brought Sophie and Duijs to the doorstep of Tjitte and Rin, who lived nearby [3-5].

Rin and Tjitte’s discovery:

Smedema asserts that Rin, upon discovering Sophie’s distressed state, became suspicious of Duijs [5]. She provided Sophie with a warm shower and questioned her, ultimately uncovering the truth about Duijs’s actions [5]. This discovery is portrayed as a critical moment where the deception surrounding Duijs’s activities began to unravel [4, 5]. Smedema recounts Rin’s conversation with him, where she questioned why he hadn’t deflowered Sophie, as Sophie herself desired and her parents approved [9]. This suggests that Rin was aware of the prior arrangement between Smedema and the Zijlstra family [1, 10-13].

Connection to the broader conspiracy:

The incident with Sophie is intertwined with Smedema’s broader allegations of a conspiracy involving his wife, Wies, and a network of individuals, including Duijs. Smedema claims Duijs exerted mind control over both Wies and Sophie [13-15]. He also alleges that Duijs used drugs, including Rohypnol, to facilitate the abuse of Sophie and other young women [16-19]. The near-drowning incident is presented as a consequence of this alleged manipulation and control.

Impact on Smedema’s case:

While the near-drowning didn’t directly impact the legal proceedings of Smedema’s asylum cases, it serves as a significant piece of his narrative. It underscores the alleged predatory nature of Duijs and the extent of his manipulative behavior [1, 8]. The incident also highlights the role of chance encounters and unforeseen events in shaping the trajectory of the alleged conspiracy.

A possible next step is to further analyze the role and motivations of Ronald and Jacqueline Zijlstra, Sophie’s parents. Smedema’s accounts suggest their complicity in allowing Duijs access to their daughter [19, 20]. Exploring their actions and statements could shed light on the extent of Duijs’s influence and the dynamics within the Zijlstra family. This analysis could also explore how their later interactions with Smedema and the authorities might have influenced the overall narrative of events.

Sophie Zijlstra: Witness and Victim

Sophie Zijlstra, the daughter of your neighbors Ronald and Jacqueline Zijlstra, played a multifaceted and significant role in your narrative, appearing as both a potential witness and a subject of manipulation within the alleged conspiracy.

Initially, Sophie’s presence offered a potential avenue for corroborating your claims. Her romantic relationship with Jaap Duijs before he was involved with the woman who allegedly stole your medical records positioned her as a key witness [1, 2]. Her testimony, along with her family’s, could have validated your accusations concerning Duijs’s actions, including the alleged listening device in your home and the concealment of medical records [2]. This potential for independent corroboration was significant, given the difficulty you describe in obtaining evidence and support for your claims [3]. The fact that Sophie and her family traveled to Miami to provide signed declarations to Judge Ford underscores the potential weight their testimony held [1, 2].

However, your account also presents Sophie as a victim of manipulation, allegedly orchestrated by Duijs. Your writings detail a complex and evolving relationship with Sophie, starting with an initial attraction and progressing to intimate encounters [4-19]. This narrative describes a young girl seeking guidance and affection, and you portray yourself as a reluctant participant, torn between your attraction to her and your awareness of her age and vulnerability [6, 9, 18, 19]. You allege that Duijs exploited this situation, using his knowledge gained through the alleged listening device in your home to manipulate both you and Sophie [20]. You describe instances where Sophie appears to be acting under Duijs’s influence, including her decision to have him, rather than you, be her first sexual partner [21, 22], and instances of alleged drug use and coercion by Duijs [23-25].

This dual portrayal of Sophie—as both a potential witness and a victim of manipulation—creates a complex narrative that highlights the alleged reach of the conspiracy you describe. It demonstrates how individuals close to you were allegedly used to undermine your credibility, obstruct your pursuit of justice, and further isolate you [25, 26]. It also raises questions about the reliability and motivations of different actors within your story, particularly given your claims of memory suppression and the tactics allegedly employed by Duijs to manipulate and control those around him [20, 25-29].

To analyze this further, consider examining the specific instances where Sophie’s actions and statements seem to contradict each other or diverge from your own account. For example, explore her initial willingness to testify for you in contrast to her subsequent actions and relationships with Duijs. Investigate how these apparent inconsistencies might have been influenced by Duijs’s alleged manipulations or your own memory suppression. Analyzing these discrepancies could reveal a deeper understanding of Sophie’s role and the complex dynamics at play within your narrative. Specifically, focus on the incident where Sophie purportedly ran to Jaap after seeing you, as this might offer insights into her divided loyalties and the control Jaap allegedly exerted.

The Duijs-Zijlstra Case: Sex, Lies, and Corruption

Hans Smedema’s account alleges that Jaap Duijs engaged in sexual activity with an underage Sophie Zijlstra, involving sadomasochistic practices and drugs, which culminated in a police encounter where Sophie, under Duijs’s instruction, lied about her identity [1-3].

The Incident:

Smedema describes Duijs and Sophie engaging in sexual activity between concrete slabs at the Drachten Industry mall. He details Sophie being tied up, screaming, and under the influence of drugs [2]. The commotion attracted the attention of employees who then contacted the local police [2, 3]. Upon arrival, the police discovered Duijs and Sophie naked [2, 3]. Duijs, at this point, instructed Sophie to lie about her age and identity, telling her to pretend to be her older sister, Floor [2].

Sophie’s Lie:

Sophie, likely fearing the repercussions of being underage and involved in such activities, followed Duijs’s instructions and gave the police Floor’s name [2]. This lie temporarily protected both Sophie and Duijs from immediate legal consequences. However, Smedema claims that the deception was later uncovered when Floor refused to corroborate Sophie’s false claim [2].

Police Involvement and Corruption:

Smedema’s narrative emphasizes not just the incident itself but also the alleged corruption within the Drachten police force that allowed Duijs to escape prosecution [2, 3]. He suggests that Duijs leveraged connections with “Porno MOL-X” and his girlfriend, Sylvia te Wierik, a police officer in Drachten, to suppress any further investigation [3]. This alleged corruption is a recurring theme in Smedema’s account, reinforcing his claims of a broader conspiracy aimed at protecting Duijs and other alleged perpetrators.

Duijs’s Manipulation:

Duijs’s instruction to Sophie to lie highlights his manipulative behavior towards her [1, 2]. He exploited her vulnerability and fear to protect himself. Smedema portrays Duijs as a cunning and experienced manipulator, using drugs, deception, and intimidation to control Sophie and other young women [1, 2].

A possible next step is to analyze how the eventual revelation of Sophie’s true identity impacted the investigation, if at all. Smedema’s account mentions Floor’s refusal to support the lie, which suggests a potential point where the cover-up could have unraveled [2]. Examining the subsequent actions of the police and the consequences, if any, faced by Duijs, could shed light on the extent of the alleged corruption and its impact on the overall narrative of events.

Google NotebookLM Insights,