Ken Kinzel Legal Matters

Submitted by fyl on 18 February, 2008 - 16:45.
The following is from Marty, Ken's widow. She is asking you to take some action and by reading it you will see why. (Attachment added.)
Dear Friends & Fellow Countrymen and Women,

Many of you must wonder if I have dropped off the planet during the past year. My life has taken an unintended direction, and now....

I need your voice of support & TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. I have been working on what I'm sending your for the past 12 hours, and it is after midnight. already.

I never dreamed this horror story would drag on for so long. Those familiar with Nicaraguan politics will know better. This week, Feb. 18-22 (we do not know which day) my personal representative in Nicaragua, and an official of the U.S. Embassy (and hopefully a contingency of concerned citizens, presently in Nicaragua) will meet with the Judge of the Public Ministry on a critical matter (see my attachment to this email) which has been dragging on for months, long after the sentencing of Ken's murderer. It is costing me thousands of dollars that I cannot afford, not to mention mental turmoil, and the inability to try and get my life back on track.

I don't care about the "stuff" that is at stake here, other than I do need to sell Ken's truck to pay bills, and there are items that were ours together, that are meaningful to keep. I will likely get those anyway. The issue at hand will become clear as you read the summary.

There is a feeling that Quakers describe as a "Leading"... an irresistible nudging to act for what one believes is justice, or for the highest good. That must be what I am experiencing. Though I'm somewhat of a Universalist in religious philosophy, I am heavily influenced by the Quakers. I am asking for your immediate support by speaking "speak truth to power" as those of Quaker persuasion would say.

(Please pass this on to whomever you deem appropriate)

Your support is critical, and can be as simple as:

  • A short email statement and a one or two-line sentence: (feel free to paraphrase anything you see here!)
  • letting it be known that you are aware of this case and its implications (and/or that you have an understanding of the situation)
  • possibly that you knew Ken and/or me, and strongly disagree with what appears to be rewarding a criminal with MORE of why they killed in the first place!
  • that you fear negative consequences for other vulnerable Nicaraguans, as well as tourists, and other foreign citizens, many of whom are volunteers...if criminals get not only easy sentences, but are rewarded for their unconscionable acts.

For more details, I have attached an attachment, which is summarizes the situation.

Can you PLEASE take a moment NOW, to email your statement of support?

You may directly address your comments to: 

 Doctora Maria Elsa Laguna 
 or simply, To Whom it May Concern 
 RE: Kenneth A. Kinzel Jr.
Please email your comments to my personal representative, Carmen Gonzalez Ruiz at: 
 carmengonruiz@yahoo.com

Also, a cc to me will be appreciated: <martyjo@gmail.com>

Carmen will hand deliver your email to court and translate your comments into Spanish.

I believe YOU can make a difference! YES, YOU CAN!

Thanking you sincerely, in advance,

Marty

Attachment

February 18th, 2008

RE: Widow's statement of the present case status involving Kenneth A. Kinzel, Jr. with regard to final disposition of our remaining property, being held in Esteli

Dear Honorable Judge Maria Elsa Laguna,

The Nicaraguan trial for the murder of my late husband, Kenneth A. Kinzel, Jr, ended almost six months ago, in October, 2007.

At that time, the court released possession of the rented house where he was killed. Back in June of 2007, less than a month after he was killed,

the police released one of the vehicles involved, the car belonging to the family of his assassin. Yet, to date, none of Ken's and my remaining possessions that were confiscated by legal authorities have been released. That includes his vehicle, which I now must sell to offset debts related to this ongoing case.

There should be no question as to rightful ownership of what is left of Ken's and my possessions, as I am Ken's widow, legally married in Nicaragua in 2002, under Nicaraguan law, and also his legal universal heir under Nicaraguan law (as evidenced by documents already submitted to the courts).

Aside from Ken's vehicle, our other possessions that are held by the police, and no longer needed as evidence, should be immediately released to me. This includes items that are in dispute, items for which the family of the convicted is illegally holding receipts, which should have been turned over to authorities, along with my late husband's other stolen legal and personal documents (refer to notarized lists provided by Esteli police and by my attorney).

As we are on the subject of receipts, I too have physical evidence (which has also been submitted to the courts), which includes bank statements of withdrawals and legal copies of receipts signed by the convicted, showing that thousands of dollars were withdrawn from my late husband's bank accounts immediately after his death and up until the convicted was arrested. I am not requesting recovery of these funds by this court.

I am simply asking that the court release to me all the remaining physical property of the estate, as I am the rightful legal heir under Nicaraguan law.

I am not making this request out of personal greed. I have already offered to the courts (through my personal representative) that the specific receipted items in dispute (bought from between approximately March 27th - April 1st until the end of May, 2007) may be offered to charity, because I believe it is totally immoral to reward a criminal. That would be to say that crime does pay. Where in the world does a criminal have legal rights?

I know of no court of law in the world. It would at least be morally and ethically right and would at least honor my late husband's memory if proceeds from the sale of these disputed items were used for the sake of Nicaragua and the safety of her citizens.

Therefore, it is only right and just and within the letter of the law, that our remaining earthly possessions be returned to me as Kenneth A. Kinzel, Jr.'s legal universal heir, and that not one single item be awarded to the one convicted of his murder, nor to the convicted via her family, all of whom have shown absolutely no remorse for the unending pain they have inflicted upon others, nor any respect for the dignity of human life,

Sincerely and in good faith,

Martha Johnson, widow of Kenneth A. Kinzel, Jr.

‹ Workers and NGOs Dealing with the Police ›
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

the on-going Ken Kinzel hearings and such

Submitted by texoce on 19 February, 2008 - 11:23.

Basically the issue is that this week one of the judges, either Maria Elsa Laguna, or another one appointed by her, will decide on the issue of Ken's few remaining assets. It is not so much an issue of money since the items involved don't include the farm or perhaps even the used pickup. They grimly include the bed where she shot him, the refrigerator where she kept his remains, a stove and a few other things. Obviously Marty (or anyone else in their right mind) would NOT want the bed where he died or the fridge where he was kept in pieces for days.

It's mainly a moral or ethical issue: is it fair to further reward the family of the murderer especially considering that several of them participated as accomplices in the post-murder cleanup and scattering of his remains around the Esteli countryside?

Crime is not supposed to pay, but in this case it already has (since she used his debit cards to access his accounts after murdering him) and runs the risk of continuing to do so.

It also sets a pretty scary precedent: someone can move in with you for a short amount of time, murder you and get to keep the goods. Not exactly a deterrent for preventing such crimes.

The "legal" justification for this is supposedly that since the assassin lived under the same roof with him, she was therefore his common-law wife and therefore has the right to inherit some of these goods. However, he and Marty were legally married, in Nicaragua, under Nicaraguan law, and had never divorced. So if Marty was his legal wife, and by living with K, she was also his legal common-law wife, does this mean that bigamy is legal? Obviously, bigamy is not legal in Nicaragua and therefore this whole hearing is a sham. Whether or not, men have several households set up and different families is not relevant. The law is the law and bigamy doesn't fit there.

They are not even trying to justify this by anything having to do with the child. It is all about K being his common-law wife and having bought things with his money and putting those things in her name.

Apparently in Nicaragua if someone has the receipts to something, it is automatically theirs. Whether or not they obtained the money to buy those things by illicit means. At least that's what it looks like since the judges have apparently repeatedly said that if she has the receipts, she gets to keep the goods.

Anyway, I know that Marty would appreciate anyone dropping a line to the judge, reflecting on any of these points, in hopes that justice may prevail.

I think again that it behooves us to try to put ourselves in her shoes. I suspect that any of us, being in the same situation, would appreciate the solidarity of others.

Wife vs. Mistress

Submitted by mjt on 20 February, 2008 - 18:18.

In common Spanish discourse people often use words interchangeably in a way most English speakers would not (girlfriend, mistress, fiance, wife, etc.). It may seem a fine or irrelevant distinction -and I do NOT know Nicaraguan law- but in some Latin legal systems a woman classified as a mistress (and especially one meeting the criteria of a "common law mistress") does have certain legal property and/or inheritance rights, or at least can claim certain items. If Nicaragua has such a law the definition of mistress would be key - though this is obviously not a case of shared properties or things acquired jointly over a relationship lasting years and how it ended would ordinarily nullify all of it. In such a country, the above point regarding bigamy would not always have any meaning, legally, since the women in question are not common law wives but common law mistresses. The legal protection exists in many countries to protect the aged and mostly the children fathered. If Nicaragua has such a law (and I do NOT know if they do) it is obviously defective in a major way if it allows someone to directly profit during, after, and from their crime, especially if that crime is murder. None of this is meant to be a defense of the murderer, and is offered only as a way of pointing out that in many areas, Latin legal systems are not a Spanish equivalent of U.S. ones, so certain legal arguments that make perfect sense in one country come up short when applied abroad - though it is hard to see what property defense the perpetrators family could possibly offer.