Thursday, March 25, 2010





Brussels, February 24th, 2010

Stefaan De Clerck,
Minister of Justice,
Waterloolaan 115
1000 Brussels.

Dear Sir,

In annex to this letter I am including a copy of the letter which we sent to the Prosecutor General of Antwerp. May I please know whether an inquiry has been carried out on the thirty minutes relating to moral offences committed against minors in which appear the name of the main accuser in this case, i.e. of Victor Vervloesem, the half brother of Marcel Vervloesem. Mr Victor Vervloesem was elected member of the Town Council in 2006, and is at present the President of the Commission for Security and Justice of the city of Herentals.

I have again and again sent you a copy of the aforementioned letter, but I have never had the honour to receive a response to it, nor to that of August 7th, 2009 relating to this matter.

This seems rather strange, in so far as the complaints of Mr Victor Vervloesem and his friends had been given due attention by the judicial authorities and by the press which back them fully, although they are only based on rumours of torture and rapes, which would date back to twenty years ago.

Besides, although Marcel Vervloesem had been cleared of these accusations, it is the media campaign launched and triggered by these accusations that contributed to the hostile atmosphere around his person nd that drove him to prison, where he was been rotting for eighteen months now. This campaign aimed at libeling Mr Vervloesem for years and years as a 'self-proclaimed hunter of child pornography' and a 'child abuser'.  His judicial file has been tampered with and falsified.  The same is true with the file containing evidence of the Zandvoort pedopornographic affair.  Moreover, Mr Vervloesem's health is extremely precarious.  All this shows how unjust and unjustified Mr Vervloesem's imprisonment is.

Yours sincerely

Jan Boeykens, President of ASBL Werkgroep Morkhoven

Werkgroep Morkhoven vzw-asbl, Faiderstraat 10, 1060 Sint-Gillis, nr. 443.439.55, (Tel.: 0032 (0) 2 537 49 97)


It is absolutely necessary to start Marcel Vervloesem’s trial again from scratch at the Antwerp Court of Appeal .
Official reports and research accounts subtracted from the file are suddenly throwing quite another light on the Turnhout trial of October 21st, 2006.
The Court of Appeal of Antwerp
For the attention of the Prosecutor General
Waalse Kaai
2000 Antwerp
Dear Sir,

Subject: Marcel Vervloesem’s trial.

Each and every one has the right to an equitable trial. As you may see, there are some unacceptable things going on in Turnhout, within the framework of an impartial and independent Justice. One thing is definitely clear from now on, much before the pronunciation of the verdict by the Turnhout Criminal Court: one will have to redo the whole trial against Marcel Vervloesem which has been dragging on for nine years now.
Indeed, as a consequence of various ‘errors’ made within the administration of the Turnhout Public Prosecutions, several items of the Vervloesem file which carry the same number as the file-documents of which they are part, were subtracted from the original file.
If the criminal court pronounces a decision on November 15th, 2006, there is strong likelihood that a complaint from the defendant about these missing documents, will cause every procedure carried out in this affair to be radically questioned. As a matter of fact, every indicted person enjoys the basic right to access each and every document belonging to his or her own judicial file, in order to be in a position to present his or her defence before the court.
The Turnhout Public Prosecutions forgot to add a 69-page compilation to the TU.52.98.101758-04 file. This compilation was deposited upon receipt of reception in the office of the King’s Prosecutor in Turnhout to be attached to the Vervloesem file. This receipt was signed by the deputy-secretary to the Prosecutor.
Marcel Vervloesem had been heard on April 15th, 2004 upon the order of the Office of Public Prosecutor of the Turnhout judiciary police force in relation with the facts mentioned in the TU.45.98.100301 / 2001 and TU.20.49.100138.00 judiciary files.
During this interview the judiciary police force added some documents meant for the defense to both mentioned files.
Neither the aforementioned minutes, nor the documents meant for the defense have ever been added to the criminal files.
On January 16th, 2004 the King’s Prosecutor of Louvain sent  the Turnhout Public Prosecutions several documents relating to the  TU.37.10102448 / 1998 criminal file. These documents included several facts that cleared Marcel Vervloesem from the accusations carried against him.
These documents remained untraceable for several months.
The inquiry led by the High Court of Justice concluded that the complaint about the disappearance of these documents as well as the one relating to the minutes were justified.
The minutes written by the Police of Haacht relating to the  TU.37.101024448 / 1998 criminal file were also missing in the criminal file in question.
The letters sent years ago to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout about the TU.37.10102448/1998 penal file, threw quite another light on this affair, and were not included either in the penal file in question. Surprisingly enough, they were letters which regarded as a child abuser, not Marcel Vervloesem, but rather his main accuser, Victor Vervloesem. The examining magistrate who carried out the investigation relating to the TU.37.L7.103093/05 penal filehas never put at the disposal of the suspect and of his lawyer the files which he had collected as part of this penal file and had subjected to the attention of the psychologist, Mr Theunis. Nevertheless, it was indeed on the report of this psychologist that the examining magistrate based his decision not to hear the witnesses for the defence that Marcel Vervloesem had wanted to use in his favour.The investigating officers of the TT.37. L7.103093 criminal file used various minutes with the respective numbers. However, they were not added to the TU.37 37. L7.103093 file, for a possible consultation by the defendant. It is true, indeed, that these minutes could be of use for the defence of Mr Vervloesem against the accusations he is subjected to.

The list of the above-mentioned official reports would already be enough for invalidating the procedure led in the criminal trial against Marcel Vervloesem.
Some jurists even speak of violation of the basic rights of the defendant and of an attempt on his right to a fair trial.
Thus, it is allowed to state that because of the elements listed hereafter, the juridical process is subject to the risk of going astray and to becoming completely derailed.

Not long agoit indeed appeared that the Turnhout Public Prosecutions had already been in the know for years owing to the fact that the main accuser had himself been guilty of sexual offences against children.The governor of the province of Antwerp, Mr PAULUS, had written at that time that the King’s Prosecutor of Turnhout had informed him that he did not know about possible acts of sexual abuses against children by the main accuser in this affair, Victor Vervloesem”. (Letter dated October 17th, 2005, ref. GE/PAUGUV/1MSOJQOFMJG.DOC).

The victims and people wronged by Victor Vervloesem’s criminal acts, declare  today that the King’s Prosecutor protected this man and that he was in a much better position than onyone else to know what was and is going on with Victor Vervloesem’s sexual offences. According to them, the Prosecutor protected Victor Vervloesem, because he could use him in his determination to take activist Marcel Vervloesem to court.

Here is a list of the facts that the King’s Prosecutor of Turnhout would have supposedly been unaware of and that his Office kept hidden to the public for years and years.

1) Letter of L.V. from Herentals, dated July 20th, 2001, and which is currently part of the  TU.37.98.102448 / 98 file:
“Johan D. told me that Victor Vervloesem had urged him to lodge a complaint against Marcel. I myself know that Victor Vervloesem had an affair with Johan D. Johan D. confessed to me that Marcel had never done any harm to him”.

2) Letter of L.C. from Haarlem, dated June 24th, 2001, and sent to Walter Wellens of the judiciary Police of Turnhout:
“I was a victim of sexual interfering and touching from Victor Vervloesem when I was 12 . I lodged a complaint to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout around February 14th, 2001″.

3) Registered letter of January 14th, 2001, sent to the Turnhout Prosecutor .
“I read in the newspaper the accusations made by Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks against his half-brother Marcel. I want to lodge complaint against Victor Vervloesem for assaulting the physical integrity of my person. Victor Vervloesem sexually abused me when I was a child. He had then tied me naked to a tree, threatening to cut my penis . He sexually abused M.C. as well.’

4) Letter of C.E. from Herentals, dated January 28th, 2004, and sent to various authorities and various lawyers:
” I read about the accusations of Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks against his half-brother Marcel in newspapers. I would like to condemn those accusations against Marcel.My 14-year old son and his friend have recently become the victims of Victor Vervloesem who masturbated in front of my son and tried to abuse my son and his friend”.

5) Letter in the hands of the local police of Herentals. Report N°107025/05 sent by L.V. of Morkhoven: “Victor Vervloesem had manoeuvered with other people to lodge a complaint against Marcel Vervloesem by using a Community centre. Complaints against Marcel Vervloesem had been entirely made up by Victor Vervloesem”.

6) Letter written by E.M. of Wakkerzele, dated 13th September 2005 and lodged at the Herentals Police station:
“Victor Vervloesem sexually assaulted a child under 18 by the name of N.C.. He did the same criminal act against S.D..”

7) Official report written by the local police of Neteland. Interview with M.V.A. from Wiekevorst:
“I know that Victor Vervloesem sexually assaulted child N.C as well as child S.D.S., and that he tried to touch their sexual organs”

8. Official record of the Police of Heist o.d. Berg, dated 13th December 2004.. Ref. ME.18.L7.104977 / 2004, interview with ST.D. from Arendonk.
” I can tell you that I was a victim of sexual interference and touching from Victor Vervloesem in the vicinity of the “stekesvijver” in Morkhoven.He tried to touch my genitals . The facts occurred in the presence of my friend NC from Morkhoven.

9) Letter sent on August 20th, 2004 by D.S. of Herentals.
” During the summer, my friend and myself had gone at some point to find shelter in a shack, because it was pouring with rain. Suddenly, Victor Vervloesem turned up. He asked us if we felt like sucking a bit. We thought that he was refering to cigarettes. Victor then lowered his trousers, he began masturbating under our eyes, and at some point he tried to touch my penis. We ran away, at that precise moment”

10) Official record of the Police of Herentals dated 28.04.2005 – Ref.103493/05, interview with N.C. of Herentals.
“Victor Vervloesem committed sexual offences under my own eyes. He began masturbating. I already made a statement together with my friend in your office department.

11) Letter of A.P. from Antwerp sent on July 25th, 2005 to the police of Herentals- Record N°1.7025 / 05:
“Victor Vervloesem sexually abused small boy N.K and his boyfriend. The father of N.K exposed these facts to many authorities. But according to this father, Victor Vervloesem is highly protected by Mayor P.”

12) Letter sent by M.V. of Turnhout to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout about affair TU.37.10 / 102448 / 1998:
“I knew Victor Vervloesem and Johan D. for a long period of time. Johan told me at that time that he had been raped by Victor Vervloesem at the age of 13. I then advised him to tell everything to his parents, but he did not dare”.

13) Letter sent on 8.7.2005 by H.D.W. from Hulshout, to the police of Herentals and added to the TU.37 37. L7.103093.05 file:
“Victor Vervloesem committed moral offences against Nick S. The child has told me everything. His father reported the facts to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout.”

14) Letter of 14.12.05. from M.S. of Westerlo, included in the TU.37.10 / 102448 / 98 file:
“It is possible that the involuntary drugs-taking by N.C. is linked to the rape perpetrated against him by Victor Vervloesem.”

15) Letter of M.A. Heist o.d. Berg dated  18.05.98 – Tu. 37/10/102448.98:
“I had been told myself that if I ever had problems with the justice, I had to declare that Marcel Vervloesem had threatened to rape me. I then had to make contact with Victor Vervloesem, who had obviously a lot of power in the world of Justice. I had never agreed to play that kind of game, because I knew that Victor Vervloesem was the rapist of two of my friends.”

16) Letter of C.B. from Herentals, dated 16th February 2006-TU.37.10.102448.98:
” The small boy by the name N. de Morkhoven told me during his visits , that he was a victim of sexual interference and touching from  Victor Vervloesem. His parents reported these facts to the police.”

17) Registered letter from the family H. de Morkhoven, dated September 14th, 2004, and sent to the Prosecutor of Turnhout. “I forbade  Victor Vervloesem to see my young son, because he committed sexual offences in front of my son and other boys.”

18) Registered letter of the family H. de Morkhoven, sent to Victor Vervloesem. TU.37.10 / 102448-98:
“Much to my indignation I have heard about the sexual crimes you have committed on my son and his friends. As a father I forbid you to approach my son again. I heard from my son and his friend how you wish to get them involved in your perverse practices towards teen-agers. I have informed the lawyer of your brother on your case.”

19) Letter of the family H. de Morkhoven sent to a number of authorities of the country, on February 22, 2004:
“Victor Vervloesem c/o OCMW in Herentals. Victor Vervloesem committed sexual crime on my young son. My son was heard on these facts, fourteen days ago. I am very much concerned by the fact that this person who is a child abuser is part of the OCMW Council.”

20) Letter officially recorded by P.W. of Westerlo at the Office of the civil cases of Westerloo, on February 23rd. Reference: 2004-TU.37.10 / 102448-98:
“I received 10,000 Belgian francs from the hand of Victor Vervloesem to lodge a complaint against his brother Marcel for attempts on public decency. Yet, I have never experienced any sexual interference or touching from Marcel, but rather from Eddy B. who also took pictures of these scenes. Johan D. got the sum of 15,000 Belgian francs from Victor Vervloesem for lodging the same complaint. He received some more money, because they also asked him to repeat this complaint in front of the cameras of the televised channel VTM.”

21) Report dated  9.01.2007 of the Service of Investigations of the Zuiderkempen Police -TU.L3.100118-2006, following a meeting with D.L.M.:

“My friend C. of Herentals and myself were raped by Victor Vervloesem of Morkhoven. The facts occurred in Morkhoven. Victor Vervloesem masturbated in front of us. He asked us if we wanted to jerk him off. He held his penis in his hands. He was masturbating.
We related the facts to N.V’s mother who advised us to lodge a complaint. The police recorded the statements.”

22) Letter of N.V. of Morkhoven, dated of 8.1.2006, inserted in the file TU.37 37. L7.1030093-0″:
” My mate told me that he had been raped by Victor Vervloesem. There was another small boy with the victim.”

23) Report LE.11 11. L8.103060-2003-dated  5.7.2005- Ref.Tu.37.10 / 102448 / 98F:
‘Victor Vervloesem had arranged a few appointments with other people at Eddy B’s house to fabricate complaints against Marcel Vervloesem. Victor Vervloesem blackmailed P.W. because he knew about some thefts which P.W had committed. P.W. told me that Victor Vervloesem had encouraged him to lodge false complaints for indecent assault against Marcel Vervloesem. He had allegedly given in to pressure, but he withdrew his accusations afterwards.”

25) Report 100572-03, dated 16.-4.2003 – For the attention of the Inspection Department of the Federal Police. Interview with W.H.:
“Victor Vervloesem tricked P.W. into lodging a complaint against his brother Marcel. P.W. had even showed me some documents which proved these facts. He told me the whole story. He seemed to be unaware that I was a policeman who operated under civil cover . As a matter of fact, I had exposed everything and I had personally handed over to you all the documents which P.W. had given me. The complaint against Marcel Vervloesem for indecent assault was a complete fabrication.

26) Report number 10101017 of the Judiciary Police force of Turnhout TU.37.98.102448 / 98, concerning J.V.S., the mother of A.G.:
“I was supposed to lodge a complaint against Marcel Vervloesem. I did not understand why. They promised to give us some money if we wanted to
testify against Marcel Vervloesem.”

27) Letter of W.V.S in the hands of Lawyer D.DF.:
“They had asked me to leave a small bag with drugs and some small bamboo sticks in Marcel Vervloesem’s house. In return, I was offered some drugs.”

The facts listed above speak for themselves.

This indeed explains the stubborn refusal to allow the consultation of all the criminal files of Marcel Vervloesem.Thanks to his knowledge of the items of the file, the King’s Prosecutor knew perfectly what happened, contrary to what the Governor of Antwerp stated.

It is now very clear why the Public Ministry of Turnhout had omitted to carry out the order of criminal judge F. Caers to subject Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks to the test of the lies detector .

On the contrary, Marcel Vervloesem had been forced to go through the test of lies detector at the federal police office. Later, Marcel Verlvloesem himself asked to have a second test of lies detector done by some specialists from the University of Milan. Both tests revealed that Marcel had told the truth.

Apart from this, we note that:
- The report from the forensic medecine department declares that  Marcel Vervloesem’s statements show a very high degree of reliability .
- The expert-psychiatrists stated that Marcel Vervloesem was a totally normal person.
- In the psychological report written by the criminal authorities, Marcel is described as a person without any obsession for children.
- The legal investigation carried out on Marcel Vervloesem’s computer did not find out any law infringement from Mr Vervloesem.
- The inquiry performed by the federal Police laboratory of Turnhout in Marcel Vervloesem’s house, did not produce any DNA proof against Marcel Vervloesem’s bona fide.
- One of the psychiatrists wrote in his report: “It is because Marcel Vervloesem is a member of the ASBL Morkhoven and because he is an activist that he is out of favour at the Turnhout magistracy “.
- Prosecutor Bourlet clearly declared that he would not sue Marcel Vervloesem for the possession and the delivery of CD-ROMS belonging to the Zandvoort pedopornographic network.

It follows from all this that Marcel Vervloesem was for many years publicly and wrongly condemned by a big part of the Flemish press. A case in point which proves this fact  is an article published by Ivo Meulemans in the newspapers Het Nieuwsblad and De Gentenaar, on 19.10.2006. The article is entitled ‘The  pedopornography hunter proves to have some paedophile sexual tastes. Marcel Vervloesem is a mentally unbalanced person’.

The articles published in the newspapers De Morgen and De Standaard do not make any reference to the results favourable to Marcel Vervloesem which are mentioned in the 36-page report written by Dr. Cosyns. This doctor notes among other things that the “media (as Marcel  himself notes) will be more and more set on ruining him”.

It is incidently obvious that the details of Marcel Vervloesem’s trial as well as the statements of the Public Prosecutor, Peter Vander Flaas have been deliberately distorted by the aforementioned newspapers.

Yours sincerely,

Jan Boeykens, President of ASBL Werkgroep Morkhoven