The Lowest Crime
A European true crime podcast about cases that happened in the Netherlands.
The Lowest Crime
Nienke Kleiss: The Schiedammerpark Murder, a Tragic Death, and the Shocking Wrongful Conviction
What if the justice system got it wrong? The Schiedam Park murder case is a story that questions police investigations and ethical boundaries. When Nienke Kleiss and her friend Maikel were brutally attacked in Beatrix Park in Schiedam in June of the year 2000, the authorities faced immense pressure from the public, leading to aggressive interrogation techniques, and the subsequent wrongful imprisonment of Kees B.
Follow The Lowest Crime on instagram to get all images related to the case: https://www.instagram.com/thelowestcrime/
Hi and welcome to another episode of the Lowest Crime, a podcast about true crime cases that happened in one of the lowest countries in the world, the Netherlands. I am Eline, and today we will take a look at the horrible case of Nienke Kleijs, a case that everyone would come to know as the Schiedam Park murder. This case not only involves a horrific assault and death of a young girl, but also a grave miscarriage of justice that saw an innocent man imprisoned for years. Keep listening to find out exactly what happened. Before we start, please know that in today's episode we will talk about violence and sexual assault that some listeners may find disturbing and, as always, even though I strive to bring you all the known facts, I am just an amateur podcast creator and there is always a chance of me making an error. So let's dive in.
Speaker 1:On Thursday June 22nd in the year 2000, just after 6pm, a little boy appeared naked and with a shoe around his neck from the bushes in the Beatrix Park in Schiedam. The boy, michael, had turned 11 just a few days ago. He walked towards a nearby bridge and called for help. A passerby was cycling home from work when he saw Michael from work. When he saw Michael, he called 112, the Dutch version of 911, at 6.08 pm, reporting that something terrible had happened in the park and that they urgently needed police and an ambulance. He described a boy with a shoe tied around his neck covered in blood, and mentioned somebody dead in the bushes. When the police arrived around 6.15 pm, they found the little girl's lifeless body left in the bushes.
Speaker 1:Nienke, ten-year-old Nienke and eleven-year-old Michael had gone after school by bicycle to play at the Beatrix Park. They had enjoyed going to the petting zoo and spent some time playing at the Fort Drakenstein playground. They had left their bicycles at the back entrance of the petting zoo. They were supposed to have dinner over at Nienke's at 5.30 pm, so around 5.15 pm Michael and Nienke started to make their way to the bicycles to head home. When they approached their bicycles they were suddenly grabbed by an unknown man who forced them into a dense area of bushes. Here the men forced the children to undress, something that took some time because of Michael's army boots with the long shoelaces. At that moment somebody walking their dog passed at a pretty short distance, making the men shove the children further into the bushes.
Speaker 1:Nienke and Michael were forced to perform sexual acts on each other. Then the man tried to strangle Michael with his hands and stabbed him in his neck with a knife. Michael, bleeding and in pain, pretended to be dead. The attacker then turned his attention to Nienke. Michael did not see what happened to his friend, but he could still hear them. Despite her desperate struggle, she was overpowered. The man used the shoelace from Michael's shoe to strangle Nienke. Michael could hear her resisting and struggling until a horrifying silence followed. The attacker tied another shoelace around Michael's neck, ensuring he was incapacitated, before leaving the scene. Michael kept still for what felt like 20 to 30 minutes before he dared to move. After that, despite his severe injuries, michael managed to stumble out of the bushes and flag down a passerby for help. The next day the police held a press conference revealing that Nienke Kleiss had been murdered and Michael severely injured. The community was in shock.
Speaker 1:Initially, reports suggested that the attacker had been a kinderlocker or childlurer who had committed a heinous act in broad daylight in a busy park. The police assumed a sexual motive. Due to the attack's nature and the evidence found at the scene, the Rotterdam Rijnmond Police Department faced immense pressure to solve the case quickly. They conducted extensive searches, interviews and forensic examinations. Forensic experts combed the crime scene for clues, collecting DNA samples, fingerprints and other physical evidence. However, the investigation was fraught with challenges and, despite extensive efforts, the police were unable to find concrete leads.
Speaker 1:Initially, on the night of June 22nd 2000, the decision was made to form a Research Assistant Group, rag, later known as RAG PARC. This team consisted of around 30 officers from various districts, with the district of Schiedam heavily presented. The urgency and severity of the case meant that resources were not limited and the team worked extensively, beyond the typical 14-day period usually allotted for such investigations. In the days and weeks that followed, michael was interrogated. Sadly, there was a great mishandling of the interrogation of young Michael. Initially Michael was viewed as only a victim and he was able to recount the events to the police and describe the attacker as a young white man with many pimples and a very pale face. But doubt started to arise about his statement's reliability and possible involvement in the crime. The thought arose that Michael might be withholding information from the police out of shame, for example if he and Nienke had been playing a sexual game in the bushes and were caught by the attacker. The possibilities that Michael had criminal involvement in the events or knew the perpetrator and was protecting him were also considered Ultimately. The investigation's handling of Michael, particularly the aggressive interview techniques and the expert's influence, raised questions about the reliability of his statements and the ethical treatment of a child witness. In short, the poor, already traumatized Michael, who was only 11 years old at the time, had to unnecessarily suffer again.
Speaker 1:On September 5th 2000, the investigation took a significant turn. Following an anonymous tip Case B a warehouse worker from Vlaardingen was arrested. He had been the one to call the emergency services after Michael had approached him after the attack. He had been seen at the park on the day of the crime and had a history that made him a person of interest. Kees had previously been convicted of child abuse and every afternoon after work he would walk in the Beatrix park looking for children whom he then tried to offer money for sexual services. However, just because he was a paedophile didn't necessarily mean that he had committed the murder. Nevertheless, the police immediately assumed he was the perpetrator and a biased suspect-led investigation was initiated, where motives and evidence are sought to fit the suspect rather than a suspect being sought based on motives and evidence are sought to fit the suspect rather than a suspect being sought based on motives and evidence During interrogations. Kees initially confessed but retracted his confession the next day, claiming it was coerced. He stated that the police used aggressive and manipulative tactics to extract the confession. Despite retracting his confession, the police charged him with the murder of Nienke and the attempted murder of Michael.
Speaker 1:The public and media closely followed the case, eager for justice to be served. On May 29th 2001, case B was convicted and sentenced to 18 years in prison and mandatory psychiatric treatment, tbs. The conviction was based on his initial confession and the circumstantial evidence, such as his presence in the park and the lack of a solid alibi. The court acknowledged that the evidence was primarily circumstantial but deemed it sufficient for a conviction. From the beginning, there were doubts about Case's guilt. Peter R de Vries, a well-known Dutch crime journalist, questioned the validity of the evidence and the methods used during the investigation. The lack of DNA evidence linking Case to the crime and inconsistencies in his confession raised serious concerns. The confession, which Case had retracted, contained details that did not align with the physical evidence or Michael's account. Peter R de Vries aired a special episode of his TV show highlighting the flaws in the investigation. He pointed out that no DNA evidence from Case B was found at the crime scene and the forensic evidence did not match his confession. Additionally, the description Michael had given of the attacker did not match Case B's appearance at all. The episode brought renewed attention to the case and added pressure on the authorities to re-examine the investigation. Despite these doubts, the conviction was upheld. Case B continued to maintain his innocence, writing numerous letters and appealing for a review of his case. His lawyer, gerard Sponck, also pointed out flaws in the investigation and the lack of direct evidence against his client. The appeals were all rejected and Case B remained in prison, continuing to proclaim his innocence.
Speaker 1:In July 2004, almost four years after Case's original arrest, a significant development occurred. Vic H, a 25-year-old man from Rotterdam, was arrested for an unrelated crime. During his detention, he unexpectedly confessed to the murder in Schiedam Park. His confession was detailed and included information that only the attacker could have known. This evidence prompted a re-examination of the case. Dna samples from Vic H matched the evidence found at the crime scene, including DNA under Nienke's fingernails and on her shoelace. This crucial evidence confirmed that Vic H was indeed the attacker. In light of this new information, case B was released from prison on December 10th 2004, after spending more than four years behind bars for a crime he did not commit. Vic H had a history of violent behavior and he had previously been convicted for sexual offenses. His detailed confession matched the forensic evidence and the description provided by Michael. Vic H revealed chilling details about the crime, explaining how he had lured the children, attacked them and attempted to kill them. His confession and the supporting DNA evidence left no doubt about his guilt.
Speaker 1:Case B's wrongful conviction revealed deep flaws in the Dutch justice system. In response, an investigative committee was established to examine the case. The committee's report, released in 2005, highlighted numerous failures by the police, judiciary and forensic experts. It was evident that there had been a rush to judgment and critical evidence had been mishandled or ignored. The committee found that the police had relied heavily on Case's coerced confession and had not thoroughly investigated other leads. There was also a lack of proper forensic analysis and oversight. The report criticized the police for their aggressive interrogation tactics and the judiciary for failing to critically assess the evidence presented. After his release, case B faced the enormous challenge of rebuilding his life. He had lost years to the wrongful conviction and the stigma of the crime lingered despite his exoneration. The Dutch government eventually compensated him financially for his wrongful imprisonment, but no amount of money could make up for the years lost and the trauma endured.
Speaker 1:The Schiedam Park murder case had a profound impact on the Dutch legal system. The revelations from the committee's report led to nationwide discussions about the need for reforms in how criminal investigations are conducted. Emphasis was placed on preventing false confessions, improving forensic practices and ensuring that every lead is thoroughly investigated before reaching a conclusion. Following his confession and the matching DNA evidence, vic H was charged with the murder of Nienke Kleiss and the attempted murder of Michael. The trial began with substantial evidence against him, including his detailed confession and the forensic matches.
Speaker 1:The legal proceedings were closely watched by the public, who were eager to see justice served correctly this time. Vic H's defense attempted to argue that his confession was coerced, but the overwhelming DNA evidence and his detailed knowledge of the crime scene made his guilt indisputable. On January 21st 2005, vic H was found guilty of all charges. He was sentenced to a life imprisonment and ordered to undergo mandatory psychiatric treatment to ensure that he would never hurt anyone again. Michael always kept out of the public eye and chose anonymity as a child. Now he steps into the spotlight not to talk about what happened to him, but to announce his political ambitions, saying he has no desire to look back on that terrible event. Thank you all so much for listening to this podcast. If you liked it, please leave a review and also don't forget to follow the Lowest Crime on Instagram to get all images related to the case. I look forward to seeing you next week.
