Nothing for the faint-hearted
Epstein, Dutroux, Teichtmeister - names that stand for the most horrific crimes against children.
Were they really just lone offenders - or are there worldwide pedocriminal networks that are still active here?
What role does the judiciary play?
Do claims of countless witnesses hold true that judges, prosecutors and investigators are not only covering
up these crimes, but are themselves involved in those?
Kla.TV uncovers shocking facts.
USA, Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Switzerland:
The entanglement of the justice system in cases of serious child abuse and murder in seven
countries is being put under the microscope.
Introduction: : I put it to everyone in writing. The worst, most perverse child abuse I have ever seen and heard
described in my life, come from the victims themselves,
the worst, most perverse offenders were the prosecutors and the judges themselves.
I mean that seriously. The most perverse perpetrators I've seen in my life were public prosecutors and judges.
And nobody takes action against these people.
And you have no idea what happens when anyone speaks out a whistleblower.
And especially with these ritual abuse victims, toddlers and infants and babies and the
children are often drugged before they are killed.
And that is the point I want to make, I have been saying for years that I have a well-founded suspicion
that we have organized crime within the judiciary here.
And that's why I say, I'll put it to everyone in writing, the worst offenders are in the justice system.
And if something should happen to me, then you can take what I have said as testimony, as sworn testimony.
Dorothea Thul's commitment and her statement had serious consequences:
Her medical colleague Dr. Jette Limberg-Diers published a cry for help, saying that the paediatrician had been attacked
and beaten up, that she had been taken to a psychiatric ward.
Her driver's license had been revoked and her house had been levied with a state-imposed mortgage,
which would lead to a forced foreclosure of the house.
Criminal charges were brought against her for insulting people on the Internet.
According to her Telegram channel, she was sentenced to nine months prison on probation in 2021,
and additionally a probation period of three years.
Dr. Dorothea Thul collapsed in the courtroom.
In April 2023, she was remanded in custody for sedition.
Since then, she has disappeared and no one knows where she is or how she is doing.
Why is such forceful action being taken against Dr. Thul?
Could it be related to her statement that the worst offenders are themselves in the justice system?
Are there indications that the judiciary is involved in pedocriminal networks?
Kla.TV investigated these questions and came across some frightening abysses.
A large number of survivors and witnesses of organized sexualized and ritual violence have testified that
high-ranking judges, prosecutors, lawyers and police officers are involved in these crimes.
Quite a few of them are perpetrators themselves, others cover up the pedocriminal networks, they protect
the perpetrators and pursue witnesses and activists.
Listen to some examples in the following.
1. USA-
The involvement of the US justice system in the Epstein scandal The US financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein ran a sex
trafficking ring with minors over a period of around 20 years.
Victims report sex trafficking and sexual assaults that took place as early as 1996.
A total of at least 100 victims are estimated.
However, the number of unreported cases is certainly many times higher.
Maria Farmer, one of Epstein's victims, who was forced to work at the front desk of a guest house where Epstein resided
at the time, observed the following over a one-year period:
Every day 5 to 10 girls were brought to Epstein, which was a very terrible thing for the children.
She spoke of a total of thousands of girls arriving at Epstein's estate.
In Florida alone, 500 girls who Maria Farmer wanted to contact to testify against Epstein could no longer be found.
She has no clue what happened to all these girls.
She strongly suspects that they have lost their lives.
Virginia Roberts Guiffre, another of Epstein's victims who was held by him for years, said:
I've seen hundreds of girls go through Jeffrey's swinging door, his constantly revolving door.
Virginia Roberts Guiffre was there live when Epstein was delivered 12-year-old triplets by the model scout Brunel from France.
The girls were forced to perform deviant sexual acts with Epstein.
However, Epstein not only abused and raped the girls himself, but also made them available to celebrities for sex.
The girls were flown around the globe for this.
Several Epstein victims gave the names of people who had sexually abused them as minors.
In addition to Epstein, Virginia Roberts Guiffre accused the following people of abusing her:
Prince Andrew, the star lawyer Alan Dershowitz, the hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin, the politician Bill Richardson,
the French model scout Jean-Luc Brunel, the AI scientist Marvin Minsky and the hotel billionaire Tom Pritzker.
Maria Farmer reported that Donald Trump as well as Bill and Hillary Clinton were co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein.
She saw them all coming in and out of Epstein’s estate and knew that they were part of the whole, Farmer says.
Epstein maintained good relations with the judiciary.
Several plaintiffs against Epstein testified that the well-known US-American star lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz, who
defended Epstein several times, was one of the perpetrators.
Maria Farmer literally referred to Dershowitz as a co-conspirator.
Virginia Roberts Giuffre - the lead plaintiff in the Epstein case - sued the lawyer in 2019 for sexual abuse and libel.
Dershowitz then filed a counterclaim for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
To this day, he vehemently denies ever having had sexual contact with minors.
The accusation that the lawyer had abused Virginia Roberts Giuffre as a minor was even removed from the files by a judge.
Dershowitz went unpunished, although several women had incriminated him.
They stated for the record that they had been sexually abused or raped by him when they were minors.
He had also become active with several plaintiffs in seeking discrediting information
and forwarding those to the lead investigator.
He claimed, for example, that Virginia Roberts Giuffre was a known prostitute and liar.
She, of all people, who according to her own statements had been forced into prostitution by Epstein and Dershowitz as a minor!
The media and legal pressure on Virginia Roberts Giuffre eventually led her to caving in and
withdrawing the accusation against Dershowitz.
Epstein was represented by Alan Dershowitz in court proceedings for the second time in 2019.
Epstein had already been charged in 2008 with raping minors and forcing them into prostitution, for which
he would normally have had to serve a life(!) sentence.
Instead, Jay Levkowitz, another highly paid star lawyer from Dershowitz's team of seven lawyers at the time,
negotiated an out-of-court settlement with the federal prosecutor of Florida, Alexander Acosta.
As a result of this deal, Epstein received a completely inappropriate prison sentence of 18 months instead of life.
He only had to serve 13 months of this sentence.
He was housed in the private wing of the prison and had up to 12 hours off every day to go to his office.
Prosecutor Acosta and the legal team around Levkowitz and Dershowitz are therefore responsible for the
fact that Epstein only had to serve 13 months instead of life imprisonment after his trial in 2008.
This was the only way Epstein was able to continue running the child rapist ring until 2019.
In addition, Epstein escaped a federal lawsuit in 2008 thanks to this deal, which in turn saved him from further investigations.
The suspicion arises that this suited the criminally involved responsibles in the justice system as well as
prominent perpetrators in that no further details of the Epstein scandal were investigated.
Prosecutor Acosta was later promoted to Secretary of Labor under Trump.
Was this a reward for his cooperative behavior in protecting the perpetrators and keeping
the true extent of the scandal under wraps?
The journalist Julie K. Brown from the American newspaper Miami Herald learned from police officers that they
were not allowed to properly investigate Epstein on the instructions of higher authorities.
She inspected court files and finally published a series on Epstein's crimes in November 2018.
She was the only one to make the full extent of the allegations public.
There was really no one following the whole thing, said the journalist.
Even the FBI, one of the highest law enforcement agencies in the USA, did not prosecute Epstein, although,
according to Epstein victim Maria Farmer, it was well informed about the sex trafficking ring with minors.
It was also known to the FBI that Maria Farmer and her sister Annie had been victims of
Epstein's sex trafficking ring as early as 1996.
According to Maria Farmer, the FBI knew exactly who was involved in the case and that Epstein was running
a blackmail scheme with child pornography material.
Nevertheless, no action was taken against Epstein.
Based on the available evidence, the FBI would have had a duty to imprison Epstein for life. But they did not.
Interim conclusion:
The Epstein case reveals that the judiciary and investigating authorities turned a blind eye, which
led to many young girls terribly suffering for years.
Unfortunately, little has changed.
His accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell has now been sentenced to 20 years in prison.
However, Judge Alison Nathan did not admit any evidence in this trial containing the names of potential other
people with knowledge about it, accomplices or beneficiaries.
The flight logs of the Lolita Express , which flew the celebrities to Epstein's island, or Maxwell's Black Book had
to be presented to the court with largely redacted pages;
With the exception of Maxwell, all other prominent perpetrators remain at large.
2. Germany: Sachsensumpf (Saxony Swamp)
- Did the justice system conceal the crimes and the group of perpetrators?
Sachsensumpf is the name given to an affair surrounding the involvement of high-ranking
personalities in Saxony in the forced prostitution of minors.
As a witness, Mandy Kopp, who was a minor at the time, made serious accusations against these high-ranking individuals.
Due to family problems, she ended up in the Jasmin brothel for minors in Leipzig in 1989.
There, she and other girls were severely physically abused, raped and tortured for years.
In 1993, the events in the Jasmin brothel became known as the Sachsensumpf affair and the brothel was stormed.
In a police interview, Mandy Kopp identified several of her tormentors:
Among them are renowned Leipzig judges, lawyers, police officers and real estate agents.
According to Mandy's statements, the judge who presided over the trial was also one of the rapists.
This judge sentenced the brothel operator to a lenient four years and two months in prison.
The brothel owner later testified that he was only punished leniently because he did not disclose the
names of the perpetrators in his brothel for minors.
This is further evidence of the entanglement of the judiciary with pedocriminal offenders.
Mandy Kopp and her fellow sufferers were questioned two more times before 2009, and again they identified
two high-ranking lawyers as rapists in photographs.
But neither the Dresden public prosecutor's office nor the Saxon investigative committee responded.
Instead, they published the victim's name and place of residence.
Mandy Kopp was then charged with defamation by the identified perpetrators.
Fearing for her life and fearing further lawsuits, she did not fully disclose what she knew.
In November 2012, the trial was adjourned after Mandy suffered a nervous breakdown on the fourth
day of the trial after seven hours of hearings.
Shortly afterwards, on January 28, 2013, the cruel deeds were barred by the statute of limitations.
However, this statute of limitations could have been prevented. Because Mandy Kopp was not alone with her statement.
The Saxon Office for the Protection of the Constitution had also investigated the red-light milieu and
handed over explosive material to the Saxon Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière in 2005.
According to the report, Leipzig judges and public prosecutors were suspected of being in cahoots with
criminals and of being involved in child abuse themselves.
The names of the perpetrators were known to the Federal Office for Protection of the Constitution.
The Office for Protection of the Constitution also reported that the red-light milieu blackmailed the public
prosecutor's office with this incriminating material.
In return, the officers in question had warned of raids, obstructed investigations and influenced trials.
However, De Maizière, as the highest authority, informed neither parliament nor the
responsible criminal investigation authorities.
He was therefore later charged with obstruction of justice in office.
However, the investigations were later dropped and the Sachsensumpf was described as hot air and a conspiracy theory.
The existence of a criminal network was denied.
Instead, the two leading investigators in the police and the Office for Protection of the Constitution were attacked.
The chief investigator of the criminal investigation department in the area of organized crime, Georg Wehling, was suspended
directly by the Minister of the Interior on questionable grounds.
Simone Skroch, formerly Henneck, department head of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution at the time, who had
already broken up a child molester ring in a previous position as a public prosecutor, was also subjected
to years of disciplinary and investigative proceedings.
Both were charged but then acquitted on the key issues after a long trial.
Thomas De Maizière, on the other hand, even rose to various posts as a federal minister during his career.
We saw the same thing in the Epstein case, when the prosecutor Alexander Acosta, after he had protected the
perpetrators, was promoted by Trump to Secretary of Labor.
Does this show the pattern of the judiciary taking vehement action against the whistleblowers while the actual
criminals go unchallenged and those who cover-up are promoted?
3. did the Austrian justice system protect the pedocriminal actor Florian Teichtmeister?
The extremely lenient verdict against Florian Teichtmeister, the Austrian actor and Freemason of the
Grand Lodge of Austria, caused quite a stir in 2023.
Teichtmeister was obviously so convinced of Freemasonry that he even built a temple on his property.
He was on trial because a large quantity of drugs were found in his possession and he
had collected 76,000 child pornography files.
Many of them were edited by him, annotated or compiled into collages.
In his comments, he described the worst fantasies of violence that he imagined inflicting on children.
From flogging, torture and gruesome rape to death, his fantasies knew no bounds.
The public prosecutor's office classified Teichtmeister on the second-highest level 9 out of 10 on a scale of dangerousness.
Despite the great danger he posed and despite the fact that children were harmed in thousands and thousands of cases and that
Teichtmeister was complicit as a consumer, he was only sentenced to a suspended prison sentence
of two years on condition that he undergo therapy.
So he doesn't have to go to prison for a single day for his actions.
Not only the completely inappropriate verdict, but also the behavior of those actors in the trial raises major questions.
It was not investigated who Teichtmeister had commented the files for, nor whether he was part of a network.
According to trial observers, there were no critical questions to the accused and no
questioning of witnesses by the prosecution or the judge.
Were they afraid that other prominent personalities would be exposed?
It was never investigated whether he had actually put his violent fantasies into practice.
This was despite clear indications, such as a shopping list found in his possession for the
purchase of girls' clothes and sadomasochistic objects.
Judge Stefan Apostol regretted Teichtmeister having been socially ostracised. He took demonstrations against
himself as a reason to grant mitigating circumstances.
The rather passive prosecutor Julia Kalmar withheld important details until the conclusion of the hearing of evidence.
Despite Teichtmeister's high level of dangerousness, that she had certified, she decided not to appeal the verdict.
The invited expert witness, Prof. Dr. Peter Hofmann, also strongly supported the defendant and played down the danger he posed.
Hofmann had already attracted attention in earlier abuse trials by drawing up strange expert reports
in favor of the accused and playing down the crimes.
He once stated: Half of the children concerned can cope well with pedophile abuse.
They integrate them into their biography and do not develop post-traumatic stress disorder.
Was it a coincidence that it was him of all to be chosen as the expert witness for this trial?
Interim conclusion:
The verdict and the bewildering behavior of the expert witness, judge and public prosecutor raise questions.
Was Teichtmeister handled gently to prevent him from uncovering other perpetrators?
Did his Freemason connections save him from imprisonment?
According to the motto with which the newspaper Der Standard already meaningfully titled
regarding the Freemasons: Brothers stick together?
4. The Netherlands and Belgium: The case of Zandvoort
The Zandvoort child porn ring is named after the Dutch seaside resort of Zandvoort, where
two of the main perpetrators ran a video store.
The worst crimes were committed in this association of child abusers.
When the case was uncovered in 1998, hundreds of films were seized in which children and even new born infants were raped.
On the yacht of one of the perpetrators, sex parties were held with elite people, where so-called snuff videos were filmed
in which children were abused and tortured to death on camera.
One of the children who died as a result was 13-year-old Manuel Schadwald, who had been abducted from Berlin
and had previously been forced into prostitution in a children's brothel in Rotterdam.
The Belgian civil rights aid group Werkgroep Morkhoven with its founder and leader Marcel
Vervloesem played a key role in uncovering the case.
The group got a hold of leaked videos showing men having sex with children.
They passed them on to the police. However, the Belgian police did not respond for 5 years.
The Minister of Justice announced as late as 1997 that there was no pedophile ring, and it later turned out
that a man on the video was related to Belgian politicians.
Due to the inactivity of the police, Vervloesem began his own investigations and succeeded in making contact
with one of the perpetrators and gaining his confidence.
However, this perpetrator was murdered shortly afterwards.
Nonetheless, Vervloesem managed to secure thousands of files with pornographic and
sometimes sadistic content by breaking into his home.
He then handed these over to the press and the public prosecutor's office.
However, seven CD-ROMs with evidence that were forwarded by the Werkgroep Morkhoven to the Attorney General of
the court in Antwerp have disappeared without a trace.
Vervloesem also seized over 3,000 documents with customer addresses and invoices, which made it clear
that the child pornography ring operated worldwide, including in Germany, the USA and Israel.
Through his investigations, however, Vervloesem himself became a target of the justice system.
He was accused of child abuse - and sentenced to several years in prison.
After spending two years in Belgian prisons, he was released in 2010 under the following conditions:
1) He was banned from contacting the press and from continuing to deal with pedocriminal cases.
2) He was not allowed to participate in the activities of organizations fighting against child abuse or to contact
his friends from Werkgroep Morkhoven, who had faithfully visited him in prison every week during his time in prison.
Isn't it very surprising that the judiciary, of all things, imposes such measures?
Were they trying to silence an unpleasant whistleblower?
And - was the judiciary connected to the perpetrators when they tried to prevent these cases from being solved?
But the media also went to great lengths to destroy Vervloesem's reputation and portray him as a child molester.
5. France: Activists Janett Seemann and Stan Maillaud report on the involvement of the French
judiciary in cases of organized child abuse and murder.
The German activist Janett Seemann had already campaigned in Germany against the disappearance
of numerous children in pedocriminal networks.
To this end, amongst other things, she created two video messages, one to the then Pope Benedict XVI and
a second to former German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
She later joined forces with Stan Maillaud, a French activist and ex-gendarme.
As a team, they specifically investigated cases of organized child abuse in which the French justice system was involved.
Stan Maillaud described the judicial procedures and measures he had researched as not only illegal, but criminal.
According to Maillaud, these judgments are not made in the name of the people, but in the name of a criminal occult power.
He and Janett Seemann investigated a number of cases in France in which members of the judiciary, such as police
officers, lawyers, judges and public prosecutors, had collaborated with selected psychiatrists.
The pattern was always the same:
As soon as sexual abuse of children was reported by their mothers, the judicial system went into action.
But not - as might have been expected - to protect the abused children and bring the perpetrators to justice.
No, on the contrary: the mothers and their abused children were subjected to police and judicial terror.
The protecting relatives were subjected to unlawful proceedings, they were imprisoned and committed to psychiatric wards.
In many cases, mothers could do nothing to protect their children from the rapists.
In several cases they were even deprived of parental custody.
For years they have had to endure helplessly seeing their children in the hands of their tormentors.
In the interviews that Stan Maillaud conducted with the mothers concerned, they specifically mention the names and illegal
actions of the members of the judiciary involved in the cases.
According to witnesses, these are also extremely serious crimes, such as filming the murder of children to make snuff videos.
Witnesses also report larger meetings where children were abused or raped by several people.
There are also witness statements that child abuse by a former French president and several ministers took place.
The commitment of Maillaud and Seemann led to these two activists also being targeted by the judiciary and police.
They were hunted by the police, temporarily detained on the basis of unlawful accusations
and subjected to inhumane interrogation methods.
They were denounced in the media and eventually even fled to Venezuela.
Stan Maillaud was tracked down there by Interpol and transferred to France, where he had to serve a prison sentence.
Among other things, he was accused of child abduction.
It is fact that Stan Maillaud helped a mother who had been deprived of custody to get the child to safety because
it was, amongst others, being abused by his own father.
The prosecutor responsible for Maillaud's imprisonment was, according to witness
statements, one of the perpetrators of the abuse.
Interim conclusion:
The investigations by Seemann and Maillaud also show that those responsible in the justice system protect the
perpetrators and downright attack victims, relatives of victims and the activists themselves.
6. Belgium: The Marc Dutroux case and the role of the Belgian judiciary
The Marc Dutroux case is probably the best-known public case of child abduction, child
abuse, torture, incest and infanticide in Europe.
Dutroux stood trial twice.
In 1989, he was sentenced to 13 and a half years in prison for five counts of sexual abuse,
but he did not even have to serve a third of it.
When he was arrested again in 1996, he was accused of abducting six girls of child and adolescent age,
sexually abusing them and locking them up like animals in the cellar dungeon of one of his houses.
Four of them died in agony in captivity.
The big controversy in the Dutroux case was the question of whether he was a perverted lone offender or whether he was
also a subcontractor for a much larger network of powerful men.
What indications and evidence were there that Dutroux was acting on behalf of a network?
1. His own statement:
In 2002, Dutroux said in an interview, in prison that there was indeed a network with many criminal ramifications.
The girls were not just there for him alone, but also for others.
2. His financial situation:
The unemployed welfare recipient Dutroux owned five houses, regularly bought stocks and had several bank
accounts in which large sums of cash were deposited at the same time as the girls were abducted.
If Dutroux had only abused the children himself, he would not have made any money from it.
3. Witness statements:
The survivor Regina Louf also reported that Marc Dutroux did not act as an individual perpetrator, but that the
co-defendant Brussels businessman Michel Nihoul organized child sex parties with the children procured by Dutroux.
Michel Nihoul ordered children between the ages of twelve and 14 from Marc Dutroux for relevant pedophile parties, she reported.
Dutroux himself also testified that Nihoul enjoyed protection from the very top.
The man had contacts to the Brussels jet set , including many customers of relevant sado-maso parties.
4. Investigations by the examining magistrate Jean-Marc Connerotte:
He followed traces that pointed to a network.
He set up a telephone number where citizens could anonymously provide information about the Dutroux case.
An avalanche of information came crashing down on the investigators.
These included statements from several young women who made unbelievable statements:
They knew about sex parties in the early 1980s in the best circles of society where children were tortured and killed.
Nihoul and Dutroux have also been seen. Even the Belgian King Albert II was mentioned as a visitor to such gruesome parties.
Interim conclusion:
It would have been absolutely intuitive to follow up the many traces that point to a network.
However, if you look at the actions of the judiciary and security authorities, you realize that everything was done
to prevent investigations into a network in order to be able to present Dutroux as a lone perpetrator:
The police did not follow up on a number of leads, including witness statements or video tapes that
were seized in Dutroux's house and not analyzed.
Other evidence was stolen or simply disappeared.
The start of the trial was massively delayed.
It took a full 7.5 years before Dutroux and three co-defendants were brought to trial.
During this time, however, at least 27 witnesses died mysteriously.
Most of them wanted to testify about connections that supported the suspicion that Marc Dutroux was not a lone perpetrator,
but that there was a network of accomplices around him.
The circumstances that led to the death of these 27 witnesses were either completely
inadequately investigated or not investigated at all.
The survivor Regina Louf had witnessed around 60 murders and was even able to name 35 of the victims.
She was also able to name the perpetrators, crimes and crime scenes.
After a psychological examination, experts testified that she had been subjected to massive sexual abuse in her childhood.
Nevertheless, her leads were not pursued and the Belgian public prosecutor's office described her testimonies as implausible
and claimed that they emanated from pure imagination.
The public prosecutor then had the dossier of their testimonies closed.
The investigating judge Jean-Marc Connerotte, who investigated the traces that pointed to a network, was removed from the case.
He was said to be biased because he had taken part in a charity event for two of the murdered girls.
This flimsy justification led to a storm of protest among the Belgian population.
However, the judicial system was unimpressed.
The examining magistrate who succeeded Connerotte, Jacques Langlois, was one of the key figures who
suppressed the allegation of there being a network.
He stopped all investigations into possible backers.
Years later, it emerged that Langlois had not included the statements of more than 600 (!) witnesses in the proceedings.
All witness statements about a network were kept under lock and key.
The investigators involved were transferred to other positions in the spring of 1997.
The files with all verifiable clues, names and suspects were closed in 1998.
Justice Minister Marc Verwilghen and public prosecutor Michel Bourlet later reported that they had repeatedly
called for new investigations - but without success, as Langlois had blocked the investigations.
Alongside Langlois, Minister of Justice Melchior Wathelet also plays a decisive role.
Wathelet, who according to victims was himself an organizer and participant in child sex parties, surprisingly pardoned
Dutroux after less than a third of his first prison sentence.
He is therefore partly responsible for the fact that Dutroux was able to kidnap, rape and
kill several young girls after his release.
However, the disastrously wrong decision to pardon Dutroux had no negative consequences for Wathelet's career - on the contrary:
He was a judge at the European Court of Justice from 1995-2003 and European Chief Prosecutor from 2012-2018.
Conclusion: Major forces within the judiciary and investigative authorities have obviously done everything to ensure that the
Dutroux case is not really solved, which suggests that they themselves were part of these
networks or were at least put under pressure by them.
The criminal entanglement of the judiciary is underpinned by the testimony of survivor Regina Louf.
She later recognized the participants of the paedophile sex parties in newspaper photos and on
television, where she had to willingly serve her clients.
According to her statements, all of them were known to be highly honorable members of society, including politicians, managers,
industrialists and even lawyers and judicial officials.
In one of the investigating judges who testified on television about the Dutroux case, she even recognized one of
the accomplices in the ritual murder of one of the babies she had given birth to during her captivity.
After this incriminating statement by Regina Louf, she was declared mentally incompetent and the
proceedings against Michel Nihoul were dropped completely.
This was done by the very investigating judge who, according to her, was one of the murderers of her baby.
7th Switzerland: The Nathalie case and the involvement of Swiss members of the judiciary in child
abuse, human trafficking and satanic sacrifices
The Nathalie case has been discussed in the Swiss media for several years.
Blick.ch, for example, reported in 2020 on the sexual and satanic-ritual abuse of
the then 8-year-old girl by her own father.
The girl herself also reported that she had been made available to other perpetrators by her father.
She had also observed abuse and utmost cruel torture of other children and adults.
She had witnessed trafficking in people, organs and adrenochrome and had witnessed satanic sacrifices.
This took place at ritual sites and in hidden underground tunnel systems, among other places.
Nathalie's accounts are consistent with countless other statements that Kla.TV
addressed in the documentaries Blood Sect I and II.
The Nathalie case also shows clear links between the justice system and the network of perpetrators.
Some people from the Swiss judicial system were even identified by Nathalie as perpetrators.
In the course of the preliminary criminal proceedings against the father, she recognized several perpetrators of
abuse, a senior judge, two public prosecutors and several police officers who had searched Nathalie's home.
Nathalie repeatedly testified during the proceedings that she already knew these people.
They had taken part in the abuse and killing ceremonies to which their father had taken them.
For example, a former head of the child and adult protection service (KES) in the responsible social region was recognized
and named by Nathalie as an abuser and child murderer.
Nathalie reported that she had seen this KES leader bringing babies to meetings and
being involved in the killing of the babies.
The KESB, which is superior to the KES, assigned Nathalie a children's lawyer, who also
was identified as perpetrator by Nathalie.
This lawyer has not spoken to Nathalie or her mother once.
She had no personal contact with Nathalie, but all the more with her father's lawyer, whom Nathalie accused of abuse.
She discussed with him how Nathalie could best be made untrustworthy by means of expert opinions.
She was obviously pursuing the goal of having Nathalie's mother's custody revoked.
This procedure is legally referred to as client betrayal.
The KESB was informed of these events.
Our editors have written evidence of this.
The senior judge responsible for the case influenced the attorney of Nathalie's mother's .
He should persuade her to withdraw the charges against Nathalie's father.
Nathalie's mother's lawyer then filed an application to challenge the bias of this
senior judge, but this has not yet been granted.
The KESB not only assigned Nathalie a lawyer who, according to Nathalie, was one of the perpetrators.
She also ordered the girl to see a senior psychiatric doctor for treatment, who was also recognized as perpetrator by Nathalie.
We can no longer speak of coincidence here.
Nathalie reported that the psychiatrist had given her electric shocks during the interrogations.
That was very distressing for her. Nathalie was alone during the interviews.
Her mother was not allowed to be present during the questioning.
Nathalie repeatedly talks about how the offices and people involved in the investigation of
her case are part of the group of perpetrators.
The ongoing proceedings have repeatedly shown that the persons mentioned were definitely not interested
in a neutral investigation, but on the contrary in covering up the Nathalie case.
Absolutely scandalous and disturbing is the fact that not the father accused of abuse, but Nathalie's completely
innocent mother was taken into strict custody for a day.
Only thinly clothed, there she was held for 24 hours in a cold cell with a stinking outhouse,
only to be released after hours of interrogation.
This action by the public prosecutor's office in charge of the case can probably only be classified as an
attrition tactic to tire and discourage Nathalie's mother.
Balz Bruder, a critical reporter for the Solothurner Zeitung, had the courage to uncover all these interdependencies between
the KESB, the public prosecutor's office and the child and adolescent psychiatrists and make them public in his articles.
This chief reporter for the Solothurn newspaper, who had written about Nathalie's case, was found lying dead in a pool
of blood after his critical newspaper reports were published.
The circumstances surrounding the mysterious death of the 53-year-old dedicated reporter were never revealed.
This is reminiscent of the Dutroux case, in which 27 witnesses who wanted to testify about these
connections were also mysteriously exterminated from the scene.
To ensure that this does not happen again in the Natalie case and in other cases and that the crimes cannot be covered up, the
victims and informants have already taken precautionary measures.
In the event that anything should happen to them, they have already copied all the evidence several times and placed it
under lock and key in various places around the world - until a demonstrably impartial justice system takes care of these crimes.
Conclusion: The examples outlined in this program are just the tip of the iceberg.
According to the witnesses, both the suffering of the victims and the cruelty of their tormentors seem boundless.
If victims manage to escape these circles and report these crimes, the consequence is time and again that the justice
system protects the perpetrators and attacks the victims. That is extremely traumatic for the victims.
In almost all of these cases, there are clear indications that this is a large-scale, cross-border network in which
high-ranking members of our society are intricately involved.
It is also a recurring theme in almost all cases that these important officials and
decision-makers were filmed during their child abuse.
This makes them susceptible to blackmail and compliant to the circles that control these networks and can thus also
force decisions in politics and the judiciary in their favor.
This also explains why discovered child pornography material is always the first to be confiscated by special forces.
None of the evidence is made public, but remains under lock and key.
It can be assumed that this is one cause of the legal bankruptcy that Ivo Sasek
highlighted in detail in his speech at the 19th AZK.
Now that important parts of politics and the judiciary are apparently in the stranglehold of this network, it is all the more
important to restore the media as the fourth balancing power, which until now has also been dominated by this corrupt system.
We therefore ask you to spread the word about this program and become part of the Kla.TV network so that light can be shed
on these judicial scandals and these criminals come under more and more scrutiny in the face of an attentive public.
All of these cases indicate that sooner or later we will not be able to avoid lawful democratic processes to empower the
impartial legal authorities to deal with such extreme cases.
However, this documentary is not intended to give the impression that all police officers, judges
and judicial officials are involved in these crimes.
Many of them carry out their important task wholeheartedly and are genuinely concerned about justice.
We would therefore like to appeal to those in particular, who are sincerely doing their service to society:
Don't be afraid to personally investigate these bad excesses in your own ranks, bring
them to the public and tackle them relentlessly.
This is the only way to prevent our constitutional state and thus our democracy from
being further undermined and seriously damaged.
You have taken up your task to ensure justice, haven't you!
Unite with each other, show courage, go public and put an end to this abuse of power once and for all!