Home kids Child Abduction: Namurs Julienne Mpemba Takes Action

Child Abduction: Namurs Julienne Mpemba Takes Action

3
0

During a previous hearing, after fainting and being taken to hospital by ambulance, she had appointed a lawyer to represent her at the last minute. She had failed to appear and was subsequently found guilty in absentia. She was arrested after serving her sentence.

As a reminder, in 2011, Julienne Mpemba founded an orphanage in Kinshasa. Between 2012 and 2016, her non-profit organization was credited with 291,067 euros despite the children being welcomed in deplorable conditions, suffering from malnutrition. According to the public prosecutor’s office, when a child died, they were “replaced” by another.

In November 2015, a dozen children aged two to five arrived in Belgium to be adopted, when in fact they had been abducted from their families!

Julienne Mpemba denied the allegations against her. “I deny everything,” she said. “The children were never taken hostage.”

Following an incident at the Belgian embassy, she believed she was the target of a conspiracy. “The ambassador told me that I would pay dearly.”

The defendant claimed to be the victim of a plot designed to “extort money” from her.

The defendant was found guilty of adoption fraud, kidnapping, hostage taking involving minors, scams, abductions, corruption, and human trafficking.

The civil parties requested that the opposition be dismissed. The lawyers and the prosecutor described the defendant’s behavior as “indecent.”

The prosecutor recalled that the family doctor who had issued medical certificates at the defendant’s request had admitted “issuing medical certificates for psychological complaints that were beyond his expertise”. The prosecutor believed that the defendant had “no legitimate excuse” for not attending the hearing.

The defendant’s new lawyers requested the court to consider the opposition admissible, once again mentioning “anxiety attacks”, as well as “alopecia” and the use of medication which, according to them, demonstrated their client’s fragile mental state. The court will rule on April 21.