The Smedema Affair: Grobben and Timmermans’ Roles

According to the sources, Tiny Grobben and Arie Timmermans are connected to Hans Smedema’s case through their relationship with his wife, Wies Smedema [1, 2]. Tiny was a colleague of Wies, and Arie is Tiny’s husband [1, 2]. The sources suggest that both Tiny and Arie have knowledge of events related to the alleged conspiracy and abuse against Wies [1-3].

Tiny Grobben’s Role:

• 1974 Trip to Utrecht: In 1974, Tiny accompanied Wies to Utrecht, where they were supposed to meet Jan van Beek [4]. This was during a time when Jan van Beek was allegedly abusing Wies [5]. According to Smedema, Tiny called him the day before the trip with an odd phone call but he didn’t understand what the problem was [4, 6]. Smedema believes this trip may have been the time when Wies was initially drugged and abused [1].
• Subsequent Abuse and Films: Smedema alleges that in 1976, Tiny and Wies were both drugged with a memory-altering substance and then abused to create films [1, 2]. This suggests that Tiny was also a victim of the alleged conspiracy [2].
• Psychiatric Care: Arie Timmermans informed Smedema that Tiny was seeing a psychiatrist because of issues related to Wies and sex, suggesting that the trauma of the alleged abuse had a lasting impact on Tiny [1, 2].
• Search for Wies: Tiny searched for Wies after Wies was left alone with Jan van Beek for hours. Jan later told Tiny that he had drugged Wies who was then found passed out in his bed [1].
• Knowledge of Abuse: Tiny’s actions and subsequent psychiatric care indicate that she had knowledge of the abuse that occurred, although Smedema suggests she may have been manipulated [1, 2, 7]. Smedema suggests she also stayed away too long that day and that Arie had called him at the time [3].

Arie Timmermans’s Role:

• Contacting Smedema: Arie contacted Smedema through the municipality and asked if Smedema knew anything about problems with Wies related to sex [1, 2]. At the time, Arie also told Smedema that Tiny was seeing a psychiatrist because of these issues [1]. Arie’s questions and concerns suggest he knew about the alleged abuse [1].
• Confirmation of Abuse: Arie’s conversation with Smedema may be interpreted as an attempt to confirm whether Smedema was aware of the abuse and the related psychological impact on Tiny. He seemed to be seeking confirmation of the events, which Smedema now knows are true [1].
• Denial: Despite Arie contacting Smedema to inquire about the situation, he later denied that he knew anything about the matter when contacted again [8].

Additional Points:

• Filming of Rape Movies: Both Tiny and Wies were allegedly filmed after being drugged [1, 2]. This suggests they were both victims of a larger network involved in creating and distributing such films [1, 9].
• Cover-up: The actions of both Tiny and Arie seem to align with the alleged cover-up. While they may have had some knowledge of the abuse, they did not reveal the full extent of what they knew [1, 2]. Smedema suggests that Tiny, in her second personality, may have cooperated in deceiving her husband, under duress [7].
• Potential Manipulation: It’s possible that Tiny and Arie were also victims of manipulation or coercion, as Smedema alleges that many people were controlled to maintain the secrecy of the conspiracy [1, 2, 10].
• Conflicting Accounts: There are conflicting accounts about what Tiny and Arie knew and when. Tiny initially denied any knowledge of the matter [8]. Arie also initially contacted Smedema about the matter, and later denied any knowledge of the situation [1, 8].

Analysis and Reasoning:

• Confirmation and Denial: Arie’s initial contact with Smedema suggests that he suspected the claims might be true. However, his later denial is an example of the alleged pattern of denial and cover-up that Smedema describes. This behavior could be attributed to fear or the influence of the alleged Omerta organization [1, 2, 8].
• Psychological Impact: Tiny’s need for psychiatric care after the alleged incident highlights the long-term psychological effects of the trauma [1, 2]. The sources suggest that Tiny may have suffered from the same kind of manipulation and abuse as Wies [1, 2].
• Context of Conspiracy: The experiences of Tiny and Arie must be viewed within the context of Smedema’s broader claims about the alleged conspiracy [1, 2]. Their actions, both the initial outreach and subsequent denials, are interpreted as part of a larger effort to silence Smedema and cover up the alleged crimes [1, 2, 10].
• Need for Further Investigation: The inconsistencies in their accounts and their proximity to the alleged abuse underscore the need for further investigation into their knowledge and involvement in the Hans Smedema case.

In summary, Tiny Grobben and Arie Timmermans’s roles in the Hans Smedema affair are significant because they both had knowledge of the alleged abuse against Wies. Tiny was a victim of the alleged drugging and filming, while Arie’s initial concern and subsequent denial highlight the alleged difficulty in uncovering the truth due to the alleged widespread cover-up. Both of their stories contribute to the understanding of the alleged conspiracy and its impact on individuals surrounding Hans and Wies Smedema.

Google NotebookLM Insights,

based on the legal written Statements on this Blog and eBooks by Victim-Author:

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