• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mass DNA study to find killer of Marianne Vaatstra (killed and raped aged 16)

I am impressed they found a suspect this way, In the US our population is much more mobile.
As the price of a DNA workup comes down,
Mini-lab promises affordable on-site DNA-based testing
expect more of this sort of thing.
Just to stir the pot some, what would happen if they took the DNA of everyone who has died, because
everyone alive today are traceable to them.
There are few 4th amendment conflicts with taking the DNA of someone who is dead, as they are beyond our incrimination.
 
Peter King said:
Well, the DNA study has yielded a result.

Yesterday evening Dutch time, the murderer of Marianne Vaatstra was arrested at his home by the police. The 44 year old man has been found through the DNA familial study done by the police and the prosecution. There has been a 100% DNA match. The arrested man lives about 1.8 miles from the place the murder happened.

The news was made public by crime reporter Peter r. de Vries who has been in contact with the family, it seems the arrested murder suspect is rather well known to some of the family members of the murdered girl.

All that is to be done now is to wait for the official response by the police but if Peter R. de Vries is this sure, it is almost 100% sure that it really has happened. I will post more as soon as I find out.
Click to expand...
So often the case.


longview said:
I am impressed they found a suspect this way, In the US our population is much more mobile.
As the price of a DNA workup comes down,
Mini-lab promises affordable on-site DNA-based testing
expect more of this sort of thing.
Just to stir the pot some, what would happen if they took the DNA of everyone who has died, because
everyone alive today are traceable to them.
There are few 4th amendment conflicts with taking the DNA of someone who is dead, as they are beyond our incrimination.
Click to expand...
Is this verifiable fact, or opinion?

They're also beyond being able to defend them self, and face their accuser, should a posthumous charge be brought against them. I believe most cases are dropped after a person dies out of cost & time concerns, not legal obligation.

Is their reputation, even after death, worth anything?
 
Ikari said:
Yay. And all they needed was a horrifically overreaching government and no concept of personal rights! A win for government power everywhere.
Click to expand...

1. there was no government overreaching, it was voluntary. It was also perfectly safe, no personal information was given to the police/prosecution about the DNA of all others in the DNA testing. All DNA will be destroyed from all the people who took part in the DNA test.

2. the Netherlands has an exceptional high concept of personal rights. Before this testing could take place they had to ask for permission of the institute that governs personal rights and they only would sign off on it if stringent rules were followed (destruction of all DNA, the DNA had to be tested anonymously and only for the DNA that showed familial DNA or was the DNA of the rapist/murderer itself would the police/prosecution been given the name and addresses. None of the DNA can be used for testing against any other crime, no DNA may be kept because as soon as the test is over the remaining DNA (and the private personal information of those who gave it) have to be destroyed by law.

3. And finally there has been justice for the girl and her family. The suspect even donated his DNA for the tests. The police, because of that. got a 100% DNA match. I think he knew his family was going to volunteer their DNA so that his goose was cooked no matter what.
 
radcen said:
So often the case.

Is this verifiable fact, or opinion?

They're also beyond being able to defend them self, and face their accuser, should a posthumous charge be brought against them. I believe most cases are dropped after a person dies out of cost & time concerns, not legal obligation.

Is their reputation, even after death, worth anything?
Click to expand...
A little of both, The State does not need a warrant to do an autopsy and that is a lot more invasive than a DNA test.
I am not sure this would be a good idea, just throwing it out there as a method of closing the DNA loop, without violating civil rights.
 
longview said:
A little of both, The State does not need a warrant to do an autopsy and that is a lot more invasive than a DNA test.
I am not sure this would be a good idea, just throwing it out there as a method of closing the DNA loop, without violating civil rights.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure of the answer myself, but if it does happen it must be very rare. In a quick 30 second Google search this was the only example I could find, and even it isn't exactly the same thing...


Korp family abandons posthumous conviction bid - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Today the Supreme Court was expected to hear an application from the Director of Public Prosecutions for Mr Korp to be "deemed convicted" of the charges he was facing at the time of his death, so Mrs Korp's children could seek compensation.
Click to expand...
"Deemed convicted" seems odd to me.

ETA: DOH!!! ABC is AUSTRALIAN Broadcast Corporation. :doh Oh well.
 
I just saw the press conference. The DNA study was done solely on Y chromosome DNA because that is almost completely unchanged through close relatives. After they found several people falling within this Y chromosome DNA profile of the rapist/killer, they found that they were all members of 1 family. On these DNA profiles they did more extensive DNA study and found that the man now arrested did match the detailed Y chromosome profile. With this information in hand the NFI (dutch forensic institute) did a full DNA sequencing on the DNA profile of just the suspect, it was a 100% match.

After he was arrested, they took another DNA sample of the man and retested it to make sure the results were OK and again, it was a 100% match with the rapist/killer's DNA that was found on the body of Marianne Vaatstra.

The name of the suspect is not known (or it at least is not made public by police and prosecution because our law says he is just a suspect and their names and identity have to be protected as much as possible). The police and prosecution from now on will make little or no public statements regarding the case just as is done in all other police investigations. The suspect is sequestered, this means he is only allowed contact with his lawyer and nobody else during this part of the investigation. The family of the suspect have been relocated to an unknown location for their own safety and to avoid them being pestered by the media or run the risk of retaliation against them by angry towns people (not very likely but they too have to be protected).

So until the trial will get underway or the investigation is over, no more information will be given by the police or the prosecution about the suspect.
 
Peter King said:
2. the Netherlands has an exceptional high concept of personal rights.
Click to expand...
Not in this regard.


Peter King said:
After he was arrested, they took another DNA sample of the man and retested it to make sure the results were OK and again, it was a 100% match with the rapist/killer's DNA that was found on the body of Marianne Vaatstra.
Click to expand...
I am confused here as I didn't see it mentioned anywhere else.
DNA found "on" the body doesn't mean that the person is the killer or a rapist.
What information are you going on?
 
Excon said:
Not in this regard.
Click to expand...

If everyone volunteered to be tested...whats the problem?

Excon said:
I am confused here as I didn't see it mentioned anywhere else.
DNA found "on" the body doesn't mean that the person is the killer or a rapist.
What information are you going on?
Click to expand...

You're quibbling over one word? "On"? When is the last time that you heard the phrase "found IN the body"?

The question you should be asking is what kind of DNA evidence was found? Skin cell dna? Hair dna? Pubic hair dna? Cum DNA? .....get the picture? I'm pretty sure that if there was pubic hair or cum found on the girl it DOES mean that the guy was the rapist and killer.
 
Excon said:
Not in this regard.



I am confused here as I didn't see it mentioned anywhere else.
DNA found "on" the body doesn't mean that the person is the killer or a rapist.
What information are you going on?
Click to expand...

The DNA of the rapist was found on the body of Marianne Vaatstra. From what I remember it was found on her naked body and it was semen.

And I still have to disagree with you, the Netherlands has a very high level of personal rights.

1. Nobody was forced to participate

2. the DNA was and will only be used for this study and now that the study is over all the DNA samples and the data from it will be destroyed

3. the DNA testing center was doing blind testing in all reality because they did not know the identity of the DNA samples they were testing.

We Dutch, as a whole, do not distrust our government because our civil liberties are well protected by law and the government can and will be named if they did something wrong and even ordered to correct the issue if it still exists. As I am not an American I do not know why so many people in the US distrust their government but we don't have that.
 
Kal'Stang said:
If everyone volunteered to be tested...whats the problem?
Click to expand...
Voluntary or not, it was already pointed out by Ikari.

Ikari said:
Yay. And all they needed was a horrifically overreaching government and no concept of personal rights! A win for government power everywhere.
Click to expand...

The government shouldn't even be asking.


Kal'Stang said:
You're quibbling over one word? "On"? When is the last time that you heard the phrase "found IN the body"?
Click to expand...
No quibbling. Do you not know the difference between "on" and "in"?
"In" would indicate that a rape may have occurred by the DNA found "in" the victim.
DNA found "on" the victim does not mean that he raped the victim.
And rape is alleged here.


Kal'Stang said:
The question you should be asking is what kind of DNA evidence was found? Skin cell dna? Hair dna? Pubic hair dna? Cum DNA? .....get the picture? I'm pretty sure that if there was pubic hair or cum found on the girl it DOES mean that the guy was the rapist and killer.
Click to expand...
No. It could mean any variety of things.
Like he came upon her after she was dead and got a nut over her dead body.
It doesn't mean that he is the/a rapist or the/a killer
 
Excon said:
Voluntary or not, it was already pointed out by Ikari.

The government shouldn't even be asking.
Click to expand...

Why not ask? A government shouldn't be forcing it...but asking? Whats the harm in that? Nothing.

Excon said:
No quibbling. Do you not know the difference between "on" and "in"?
"In" would indicate that a rape may have occurred by the DNA found "in" the victim.
DNA found "on" the victim does not mean that he raped the victim.
And rape is alleged here.


No. It could mean any variety of things.
Like he came upon her after she was dead and got a nut over her dead body.
It doesn't mean that he is the/a rapist or the/a killer
Click to expand...

Umm...you do know that they can tell the difference between consensual sex and "indifference" sex (IE dead body in this case) vs rape right?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Umm...you do know that they can tell the difference between consensual sex and "indifference" sex (IE dead body in this case) vs rape right?
Click to expand...
You do understand that is why the distinction between "on" and "in" is significant?
 
Police asking if you will submit a DNA sample isn't the same as your grandmother asking if you'd like another chocolate chip cookie.
 
Police declared today that Jasper S confessed to the rape and murder of Marianne Vaatstra.

We should do these DNA studies more often!
 
Djoop said:
Police declared today that Jasper S confessed to the rape and murder of Marianne Vaatstra.

We should do these DNA studies more often!
Click to expand...

Kindly leave me out of it.
 
His lawyer said he confessed to him within 10 minutes of meeting him, he was relieved to finally be free of keeping this heinous crime secret, especially as he lived so close to the parents (geographically) and in the region the murder was never forgotten or far from peoples minds. He didn't feel that he could go to the cops and confess after all these years but when the study of the DNA was announced he knew his goose was cooked and thus he participated in the test. He knew that he would be traced through his families DNA so he participated himself and then I guess waited for the cops to come and arrest him.
 
The District Attorney is doing his summation for the court in which he will formulate the punishment he will ask the court to hand down to Jasper S. The trial itself started on March the 28th, witnesses for the prosecution and defense were heard yesterday and today in the morning. Now the prosecutor is busy with his summation, then the defense will give their summation and request for their punishment. Then the court will adjourn and in 2 weeks time (maybe a bit longer but the court will say on which date it will announce the verdict) the verdict will be read and the punishment handed down (or acquittal if they think he is innocent).

Now a lot of details of this case are coming forward:

- there were 12 biological traces found on the dead body of Marianne Vaatstra, all belonging to 1 and the same person. 100% indicative of perpetrator DNA.

- when the suspect put his hand over the mouth of Marianne Vaatstra she bit him in the hand. A drop of his blood was found on her coat.

- she almost certainly scratched him as the perpetrators DNA was found under her fingernails

- the psychiatrist that studied/investigated Jasper S. says that no mental disorder has been found in him. This will almost certainly indicate that he will not be sent to a mental institute after he has done some or all of his jail time

- to stop Marianne Vaatstra's frantic struggling the suspect tied her hands with her own bra in the same manner he ties the knot to hold closed the fence on his farm

- the suspect used her own bra and the straps of her back pack to strangle Marianne Vaatstra, when he found she was still breathing he slit her throat three times

- the suspect had the knife he used to cut her throat in his pocket when he was arrested
 
The DA has asked the court to sentence Jasper S. to 20 years in jail.
 
the verdict well be handed down on April 19th.
 
Well, the guilty person is long behind bars, he got 18 years and he has chosen not to appeal his conviction.

But this week, sadly again the case is in the spotlights again and in the courts again. After winning 266 thousand euro's against 2 writers in 2013 and 2014, who had used parts of her own diary (of which they were forbidden from publishing parts, but they had re-written them slightly to try and get out under the ban on using that material). Now in her diary she had believed the rumors that were written/published early in the investigation that an asylum seeker had committed the murder and that the government was covering up the case by claiming it was not an asylum seeker (the government already knowing from rape dna found in her body that the profile was that of a Western European white person).

When the DNA of the real culprit was found to be a match and that this person was subsequently convicted the woman thought she would be finally be able to mourn her daughter in peace.

But up came the book from Wim Dankbaar and his continuing claim that the wrong man had been convicted of Marianne's murder. Something, even though there was DNA and the murderer confessed he did it, he still keeps claiming.

According to the mother the publicist Wim Dankbaar is trying to emotionally destroy her with his constant attempts to try and contact her and to try and involve her in the conspiracy theory Dankbaar has about Marianne's murder. Among other things, Dankbaar has publishing letters apparently written by the mother of Marianne Vaatstra (about the case) but who in fact were written by Dankbaar himself. He also says that the mother's acceptance of the verdict is "the ultimate betrayal of her daughter". And that it is his opinion that the mother should support him in his conspiracy theories.

Dankbaar is convinced that the wrong man was convicted for the crime, he thinks that the real culprit was an asylum seeker and that the highest forces in the country have conspired to convict the wrong man using faked DNA evidence.

The mother is suing the publicist to force him to leave her alone (through a restraining order) and with heavy fines if he still contacts her. The brother of the mother is suing Dankbaar for the same thing.

On his website Dankbaar has already stated that he expects to be found guilty/convicted because the government put a judge on his case that is out to get him. That is a great departure from a few months ago when he believed the judge to be competent and independent.

This is not the only legal case against Dankbaar, he has been convicted of slander previously (to several months in jail) but that case is now on appeal. The prosecution had asked the judge to let a psychiatrist study Dankbaar but Dankbaar does not want to participate because he claims to be innocent and it is his duty to make his case about this wrongful conviction no matter the consequences for the family of the dead girl.

More will follow I do not doubt.
 
idiot stalker of mother of Marianne Vaatstra has been forbidden from contacting the mother in any way shape or form and may no longer post in the name of the mother that someone else is guilty of the rape and murder of Marianne Vaatstra. The first time he breaks that contact ban he will have to pay 20,000 euro's with a maximum of half a million euro's (20,000 euro per violation with a maximum of 500,000 euro's).

Good decision by this judge, he daughters case took 14 years to solve and now, 18 years after the murder happened and 4 years after the guilty verdict, DNA match and confession of the murderer, this idiotic conspiracy nut (who believes the government and others, among them the parents, are conspiring to keep the truth from getting out and jailing someone he feels in innocent) has to stop pestering the parents time and time again.

But there are more than 1 court case in civil and criminal court (in criminal court for slander and in civil court for theft and illegal publishing of personal possessions of the mother).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom