Anita Frielink (ps) of police Zeist is investigating the report of N. Achikzei

Utrecht Police Department
District Binnensticht
Zeist
File no: PL0920/09-001375

P R O C E S – V E R B A A L

---

By me Anita Frielink (ps)
Asp.police officer of police, Utrecht, district Binnensticht
the following is stated:

ADDRESS
=========

Indicator N. ACHIKZEI had filed a report of defamation, libel
and insult. The declarant is engaged to Mr. Z. Mehraban.
(Note verbal investigator: from investigation it appeared that defendant assumed that both were married
and that N. ACHIKZEI today is named N. MEHRABAN).

The defendant was the employer of the respondent from June 1, 2007 to May 7.
2008. On May 6, 2008, the declarant allegedly received an email from the
defendant stating that she could take the entire month of May off. On 7 May
she was told by telephone by the defendant that her contract would not be
would not be renewed at Advios.

Then the following day, the declarant received an email from the defendant stating
stating that the defendant’s fiancée had sent him a death threat.
Defendant then wanted declarant to withdraw her death threat.
Defendant indicated that she had not sent a death threat.
(Note: no evidence of the threat was found).

Subsequently the respondent received a total of about two to three hundred emails
from her now ex-employer since her dismissal. These mails stated that
her husband was a stupid Afghan man and that he was a Salafist and/or a
fundamentalist. The defendant also wrote that the defendant, in the name of Islam
was waging a jihad against him.

Internet defamation:
The accused expressed himself in a very undesirable way
towards the defendant, namely on the following internet sites:
www.internetoplichting.nl
expiratieweb.nl
god.for.fools

On the site of oplichting.nl, individuals warn each other about alleged
scammers, the name N. MEHRABAN appeared regarding scams. There was also
a bank account of N. Mehraban was mentioned.

Defendant stated that this surname and initial corresponded to those
of the defendant. Defendant started to add comments to the site towards
the injured party.

However, investigation by verbalizer at the bank revealed that the declarant
has nothing to do with the N. Mehraban on the scam site. The
bank account number does not match.

The attached statements from the Internet sites show:

---

PL0920/09-001375- 1

File no: PL0920/09-001375

---

– he says that the declarant has gone into crime
– he says the declarant is a fraud.
– he says that the declarant is a liar and that she filed a false report.
made.

HEARING
=========
Suspect was interrogated on January 21, 2009. Defendant was in no way able
prove that he had actually been threatened by the declarant. He referred to
his own website of his work: expiratieweb.nl in which he told his own
story.

After the suspect was interrogated by the police, the next day he again
posted a piece on scam.nl. This page is attached to the file.

Suspect seems to be convinced that declarant is under the influence
of one Abdul Jabbar van der Ven whom he does not know personally and of whom he is
is not sure whether declarant knows him personally. According to the accused
suspect is conducting a hate campaign against him through this Abdul Jabbar and suspect feels himself to be the victim in this.

Comment verbalizer regarding state of mind of suspect:
========================================
During the interrogation it appeared to us that the suspect, despite his
co-directorship of a financial advice bureau, could possibly have tunnel vision
with regard to the defendant. Possibly the suspect could have reality and fiction
regarding the declarant mixed up. For example, he acknowledged that it was a
blunder that he had associated her name with the name N. MEHRABAN on the
site www.internetoplichting.nl, while a day after the interrogation he again on
this site again associated her name with the declarant.

From statements made by the accused and communications from the declarant, as a
motive for the defendant’s behavior could be that the defendant
would have liked to marry the defendant himself.

Communication from the injured party revealed that on February 3, 2009, both were
were parties to a civil law case. It dealt with the dismissal
of the injured party. That case also involved defamation through the
www.internetoplichting.nl cited. There, too, the defendant testified to
Tunnel Vision.

Of which by me,
Anita Frielink (ps), under oath of office
has drawn up this official report, which I closed and signed
at ZEIST on February 6, 2009.

Anita Frielink (ps)

---

PL0920/09-001375- 2*