Chain of Evidence in the Death of Kirsten Roya Azal (Berlin, March 2019)

 

This dossier summarises and connects annexes A–G, each documenting a stage in the medical-legal process following the death of my late wife, Kirsten Roya Azal (12 March 2019, Berlin). Taken together, they demonstrate a compromised chain of evidence, anticipatory framing, and procedural interference consistent with potential foreign interference. Scans of all originals have been forwarded to the IGIS (Inspector General of Intelligence and Security) for review.

1. Annex A (Oertel’s Letter, 03.09.2019):
Dr. Stephan Oertel, former treating physician, confirms that the autopsy could not determine a cause of death. He rules out hyperglycemia as a cause, notes the absence of diabetes, and raises the possibility of intoxication from recent Permethrin use. He explicitly questions whether glucose-containing infusions were administered during resuscitation. His letter demonstrates that the official cause of death remained unresolved, despite prosecutorial closure.

2. Annex B (Prosecutor’s Reply, 11.09.2019):
The Staatsanwaltschaft (Prosecutor’s Office) Berlin states that no further forensic investigation was conducted, emphasising that their inquiry is limited to determining whether there is criminally relevant third-party culpability. They attach the emergency doctor’s protocol (Annex D). This indicates a narrow legal framing that precluded proper medical clarification, effectively insulating irregularities from scrutiny. 

3. Annex D (Emergency Physician Protocol, 12.03.2019):
This first record attributes critical testimony to “the daughter,” stating that the patient complained of dizziness before collapsing. This is factually false: my daughter was asleep and never spoke to the physician. I was the sole adult eyewitness providing information (including about Permethrin), yet my testimony was erased. This falsification occurred at the very first point of record, contaminating the chain of evidence at its origin and embedding a misleading “diabetic collapse” narrative that shaped all subsequent determinations.

4. Annex E (Preliminary Death Certificate, 12.03.2019):
Issued by Charité hospital staff, it records the cause of death as “undetermined.” This acknowledges uncertainty but does not reconcile it with the fabricated clarity of Annex D.

• Chain of evidence originates in falsified testimony (Annex D).
• Expert review (Annex A) contradicts official narrative but is disregarded.
• Prosecutor (Annex B) restricts inquiry to exclude toxicological/iatrogenic causes.
• Police (Annex F) breach duty to investigate unexplained death.
• Final registry (Annex G) erases ambiguity, institutionalising a compromised record.

 

5. Annex F (Police Death Report, 12.03.2019):
Filed by Berlin police to the registry office, it confirms the official time and place of death. Critically, under German law such a case (“unexplained death”) required immediate police investigation, including eyewitness interviews within 24–48 hours. No such interview was ever conducted. This omission could not occur without interference or directive from above.

6. Annex G (Civil Registry Death Certificate, 17.04.2019):
The final Sterbeurkunde records Roya’s death as fact but omits all questions of causation or procedure. Its issuance institutionalises the compromised record and closes the legal chain without addressing prior irregularities.

Synthesis:

• The chain of evidence begins with a falsified attribution (Annex D).
• Medical expert review (Annex A) contradicts the narrative yet is disregarded.
• The prosecutor (Annex B) restricts scope to criminal intent, excluding toxicological/iatrogenic possibilities.
• Police (Annex F) fail to act on their clear obligation to investigate unexplained death.
• Final registry (Annex G) erases all ambiguity, cementing a compromised narrative.

Implication:
This pattern cannot be explained by oversight alone. It reflects anticipatory framing and suppression of inquiry at multiple institutional levels. The coordinated effect was to foreclose all avenues of clarification, ensuring that the true cause of death remained unexamined while a convenient narrative was embedded and institutionalised.