Natascha Kampusch – The forum on the case

If, contrary to expectations, the name Natascha Kampusch is not familiar to you, you can first get a rough overview on Wikipedia. Already here, two versions stand out: Under “Abduction of Natascha Kampusch”, you find a more extensive (also critical) collection of material, and under “Natascha Kampusch”, you find a streamlined, “contradiction-corrected” version, which is often linked by Kampusch supporters.

The case of the 10-year abduction and 18-year self-liberation victim with astonishing star airs has increasingly polarized the world population. If you belong to that – ever-growing – group that can no longer hear or read the name Kampusch, you will find open doors with us. As directly affected individuals, we cannot and do not want to simply move on and silently watch as the strategy of a series of unscrupulous actors seems to be permanently successful: Namely (ironically) spreading the cloak of silence over a mega-scandal under the pretense of “victim protection interests”, the clarification of which would cost them their heads.

The detective agency Pöchhacker came to the case – a few days after Natascha Kampusch disappeared on March 2, 1998 – like the Virgin to the Child. As specialists in the search for missing children, this case electrified us in a very short time to such an extent that we not only did not accept any fee but also subsequently – literally – spared no expense or effort to clarify the fate of the child. Always firmly convinced that we had not yet achieved tangible success simply because we could not see the forest for the trees. Therefore, the case is known to us in many facets like hardly anyone else and is particularly close to our hearts.

The revealing of a series of unspeakable investigative blunders by the originally responsible Security Office (SB – now Criminal Directorate 1) triggered, in 2002, under the leadership of Ernst Geiger and the political responsibility of Interior Minister Ernst Strasser, a reflexive cover-up orgy. At least the case was taken away from the SB and transferred to a specially established “SOKO Burgenland”. A unique stage victory for a private detective in Austrian criminal history? Far from it! It was actually a unique bluff because no one dreamed of correcting the mistakes pointed out and initiating serious investigations. Least of all, perhaps, SOKO chief Nikolaus Koch himself.

Necessarily, in November 2004, the book “The Case of Natascha – When Policemen Go Over Corpses” appeared. With numerous facts, names, and (to this day unresolved) contradictions. My (thankfully false) assumption that the child was no longer alive and the demand for a long overdue excavation at a pond owned by a friend of Brigitta Sirny (mother of Mrs. Kampusch) is now repeatedly used as “evidence” against me, how much I would have been “off” – and thus automatically still am. It is wisely omitted that among the approximately 30 excavations ordered by the police, hardly any search was made for a living person. And that, of all people, this pond owner has been proven to have lied as a witness – and this did not result in any sanctions (!).

This forum was launched on February 10, 2005. So long before Natascha Kampusch resurfaced like a phoenix from the ashes on August 23, 2006. Remarkably, this platform (so far) has not resulted in any lawsuits (unlike, for example, former VGH President Ludwig Adamovich) despite the fact that Natascha Kampusch and her support staff have been able to read since May 2008 that Mrs. Kampusch lied as a witness in court.

However, this forum cannot be ignored or/and indifferent to the affected, as it was clearly attempted from the orbit of the Kampusch family to take “designer” part. Significantly, however, not to exercise (desired) open criticism or to clear up “misunderstandings,” but to throw “anonymous” smoke grenades with stupid methods. In plain language: The forum was to be flooded with meaningless posts to dilute facts and core statements and to show every newcomer immediately what a bunch of idiots is at work here. As a result, some user profiles had to be blocked. New users can only post after prior legitimation (ID via email). Apart from that, there should be no great speculation about possible backgrounds of this case here, but for persistently interested parties, the opportunity for a “time travel” through the posts is offered by sifting through the contributions.

Many former – seemingly incredible – claims have since been proven by disclosed document contents. When I wrote in my book in 2004 of a “cover-up orgy with mafia-like tendencies”, I was pitied by many (journalists). Today, many have stopped laughing, and perhaps someday there will be a serious discussion about the state of investigative journalism and the “Fourth Estate” in Austria.

Austria has undoubtedly outdone itself as a land of committees and commissions. No criminal case has been “committee’d” or/and “commissioned” as often as this one. The result is known: Of a total of four public prosecutor’s offices, three are biased – the rule of law is on the verge of collapse.

As a creative elastic feat, it is now known that even the FBI and the Federal Criminal Police Office Wiesbaden were asked for assistance. For insiders, the motive for this seemingly humble confession was immediately clear: Through foreign experts, one wanted to suggest an untouchable objectivity and professional competence and at the same time definitively shift the responsibility!

On April 15, 2013, this evaluation report was promptly presented to the public with powerful support from the president of the German Federal Criminal Police Office, Jörg Ziercke. The obvious motto: Ziercke spoke, the case is closed. The credibility of one of the boldest claims, that SOKO Burgenland had (merely) suffered from leadership weakness, is left to the reader of the forum by the publication of various correspondence for their own assessment.

Walter Pöchhacker