The girl was born in 2004. Her father is Drąsius Kedys, and mother - Laima Stankūnaitė. The parents lived together for several years but later got divorced. According to the decision of the court, the custody of the girl was granted to the mother; however, she did not take proper care of her child. Having learned about this, the father decided to bring the child back. The court approved the decision, the mother refused the custody of the girl and the custody was granted to the father. The girl returned to live in the house of her father and saw her mother only rarely. However, she started telling that while living at her mother's she had been raped by some men, and that her mother Laima Stankūnaitė used to take her to some rented flat, where she had to satisfy sexual needs of three grownup men, had been molested, and sexually abused.

As soon as Drąsius Kedys learned about this, he immediately referred to the police asking to initiate a preliminary investigation.

The investigation was soon initiated; however, when it turned out what men were being accused of the paedophilia, the investigation was discontinued abruptly and illegally.

One of the named persons was Jonas Furmanavičius, the judge of the Kaunas Regional Court, the second - businessman and politician Andrius Ūsas, and the last one was not identified and was referred to as Aidas by the girl.

Father Drąsius Kedys submitted more than 200 statements to the Lithuanian law enforcement authorities asking to investigate the case of paedophilia consistently and radically.

Nevertheless, such proper, detailed and honest investigation was not initiated. Finally, on October 5, 2009, Drąsius Kedys was announced missing. On the same day, judge Jonas Furmanavičius and Violeta Naruševičienė, the sister of Laima Stankūnaitė, who, according to Kedys, had also been an alleged accomplice in this procuration case, were shot in Kaunas. Drąsius Kedys was charged publicly with this crime, even though neither his fingerprints on the firearms, nor other facts proving this crime had been detected and confirmed. Drąsius Kedys was also defamed publicly by the press, where he had unduly been blamed for drug abuse and partnership with members of criminal gangs, even though no such things had ever occurred in the life this honourable man and father.

Potentially corrupt Lithuanian law enforcement authorities did not initiate a detailed investigation of the death case of Drąsius Kedys. In April, 2010, he was found dead - evidently beaten and murdered.

His body was found near the Kaunas Lagoon. The official version stated that had been drinking and "choked on the contents of his stomach." However, independent experts confirmed the conclusion that he had been beaten and drowned in the water.

All this time, the custody of the girl of Drąsius Kedys was granted to his sister Neringa Venckienė, the judge of the Kaunas Regional Court, in whose house the girl felt safe and well cared for. Moreover, all this time, Neringa Venckienė was submitting statements to the Lithuanian law enforcement authorities demanding the initiation of fair investigation of both the paedophilia and the murder of Drąsius Kedys cases. Due to negligent and irresponsible investigation of the prosecutors, the Committee of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania had to be formed, which had to present the conclusions on the wrong actions of the prosecutors. The Seimas stated the criminal misuse of duties by the Prosecutor General and his subordinates. With reference to the material of the criminal case on the sexual abuse of the girl as well as all the additionally collected data, the Seimas stated that the evidence of the sexual abuse of the girl was clear and that allegations in relation to the serious crime provided for in Part 4, Art.150 of the Criminal Code (on the sexual abuse of young children) had to be made against those suspected in this criminal case long time ago. This resolution of the Seimas and the conclusions were announced publicly throughout Lithuania and were also presented to the President. These documents of the Seimas were never disputed or appealed against. This means that the conclusions and the resolution of the Seimas are lawful, valid and can be ignored neither by law-abiding officers nor by the citizens of Lithuania.


Drasius Kedys tried everything to get Lithuanian authorities to listen to his daughter's case. He is supposed to have shot dead two of the suspects named by his daughter, but the evidence for this has never been made public. All that is known is that he went missing on the same day and turned up dead several months later.
The Committee of the Seimas comprised of well-known national lawyers could not have produced different findings as, according to the results of two psychological inspections including the complex psychiatric and psychological examination, the girl was capable of thinking and answering questions, and she was not inclined to fantasizing and was telling the truth. In other words, the girl has experienced sexual exploitation by paedophiles. Attention should be paid to the fact that the child is protected from sexual abuse not only by our national criminal legislation, but also by the Convention on the Rights of the Child ratified by our state in 1995. Article 34 of the Convention states that, "States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse." Such an allegation concerning the commitment of a very serious crime was made against the defendant Andrius Ūsas by Vilnius district prosecutor Nerijus Bieliauskas after a long process of passing the criminal case from one office of prosecutors to another. The testimonies of both Andrius Ūsas and Laima Stankūnaitė were checked with the lie detector, the indications of which were unambiguous - both were lying while negating their complicity in the crime.

In its decision, the Vilnius District Court indicated that it is possible to allege justly that by allowing the suspected Andrius Ūsas to molest the young girl and by directly observing the criminal actions being inflicted on the child, Laima Stankūnaitė assisted in the sexual abuse of the girl.

This decision was sent for execution to the Vilnius Office of Prosecutors. Taking into consideration the fact that, according to the Constitution, justice is administered by the court and having analysed the material of the criminal case, all law-abiding prosecutors would have made allegations against Laima Stankūnaitė in respect of complicity in the sexual exploitation of the young girl and the abusive acts, and would have given the case to the court. However, official allegations have been made neither against Jonas Furmanavičius, nor against potential procuress, the girl's mother Laima Stankūnaitė.

Not only that the decision of the district court was not executed, but also the commitment of a very serious crime, i.e. sexual exploitation of the girl, was removed from the allegation made against Andrius Ūsas leaving only a minor crime - abusive acts. Nothing has also been done in respect of Laima Stankūnaitė, with the exception of the indictment (during the transfer of the case to the court) stating that the abusive acts (i.e. the licking of the whole body of the girl as well as her genitals, and forcing her to do the same for him) lasted for two years in the flat rented by Laima Stankūnaitė. Lithuanian prosecutors mocked not only at the decision of the judges, but also at the conclusions approved by the Seimas as all the criminal acts inflicted on the girl by Andrius Ūsas and indicated in the indictment by the prosecutor correspond to the signs of a serious crime provided for in Part 4, Art.150 of the Criminal Code, i.e. the girl was sexually abused, and all the actions were performed forcibly, against the will of the girl and, therefore, both Andrius Ūsas and Laima Stankūnaitė had to stand before court for this.

Currently, the girl is going through a really hard time as the District Court of Kėdainiai Region passed the urgent decision to pass the custody of the girl to her biological mother, who was a potential observer of paedophiliac crimes and was inevitably aware of them, and to revoke the custody earlier granted to the sister of the father, Neringa Venckienė. The girl has been living with this custodian for several years, has already become accustomed to her, and there is a truly deep emotional bond between them as well as absolute confidence in each other. Moreover, the girl has been in close relation with the entire family of Neringa Venckienė, i.e. her husband Aidas, cousin Karolis, grandmother and grandfather. She attends the secondary school located not far from the house of the custodian, and has already got accustomed to her class, has got many sincere friends. However, under the urgent decision of the court, she had to be returned to her biological mother within 14 days, even though the mother is a complete stranger to the girl and brings back only bad memories. Having learned the news that she would soon have to move and live with her mother, the girl suffered a psychological shock - at home she felt sick, vomited, screamed, and cried, thus, an ambulance had to be called. Since that day, the court has appointed daily meetings with the biological mother by adding daily two more hours to each meeting; however, the girl refused categorically to attend them and could not be persuaded otherwise. From that moment on, the Services for Protection of the Rights of the Child of the Republic of Lithuania have been engaged in grotesque moral and spiritual abuse of the girl - every day several psychologists and service employees come to her house trying to convince her to obey the decision of the court and inflicting psychological pressure. Since then, the girl has become exhausted emotionally. She asks her permanent custodian, aunt Venckienė not to give her back to the biological mother; she sleeps together with Neringa Venckienė, and follows her wherever she goes day and night. The girl expressed her will and right to live in the family of the custodian clearly.

Yet the courts of Lithuania and the Services for Protection of the Rights of the Child refuse to pay any attention to the expressed will of the girl and threaten to take her from the house of the custodian by force; as a representative of the services put it: "to bring her out of the house wrapped up in a blanket."

Thousands of people of Lithuania are watching the tragedy of the little girl with their deepest sympathy. They stand guard near the house where the girl lives, organise pickets near the Lithuanian law enforcement authorities. Unfortunately, the girl still has not received proper understanding, attention, or assistance from the institutions.

Such brutal and rude abuse of children by the Lithuanian law enforcement authorities and the institutions of the rights of the child cannot be justified in any way.

Firstly, this contradicts the right to make decisions of the girl, violates her birthrights and freedom to choose her place of living, affects her dignity, and ruins her personality.

Secondly, the suspicions that the mother of the girl could have participated as an accomplice in the paedophilia case have still not been cleared; this case and other related cases are not yet closed in Lithuania.

Thirdly, mother of the girl Laima Stankūnaitė has no clear place of residence, work or income; is guarded by masked security guards unwilling to reveal their identities, and, it is stated, that following the State Protection Programme, both the mother and the girl will be immediately sent away from the Republic of Lithuania to some foreign country. In other words, the girl will be separated abruptly from her normal environment and the closest people she loves for good.

Fourthly, the girl is a significant and direct witness in the paedophilia case in Lithuania, and it is highly probable that criminal structures may attempt to destroy her together with her mother, who is also the witness of the existence of the paedophilia clan. Therefore, the return of the girl to her biological mother poses a direct threat to her life. The Lithuanian clan of paedophiles and corrupt officers has obviously penetrated the system of state law enforcement and government, and has a great impact on the passing of legal decisions. That is exactly why we are shouting loudly for help "SOS". Please, help to save the girl. Help to save her life, offer her the necessary protection, and ensure her future. We believe that the transfer of the girl who is the main witness to the persons who allegedly organised and contributed to her sexual abuse will prevent the execution of a fair and fast investigation and will allow the responsible people to escape legal responsibility for their actions. We kindly ask you to take all possible and proper measures to remind the Government of Lithuania of its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child of the UN to ensure the proper investigation in cases of sexual abuse of children, and make the related persons assume responsibility for their actions.

We kindly invite you to urge the Government of Lithuania to observe its international obligations and ensure the protection of basic human rights. We do believe that you will inform the international community about this procedure, and the received international attention would be of great help to the girl who cannot defend her interests in Lithuania. We are willing to cooperate and, if necessary, we can provide you with additional information on this case, which has moved the society of Lithuania so deeply. We would be grateful, if you distributed this notification by all possible channels and means of distribution. P.S. From the psychological interrogation of the daughter of Drąsius Kedys. On March 23-May 25, 2009, the inspection was performed by the National Service of Forensic Psychiatry in Lithuania under the Ministry of Health. The examination act states that the girl is "capable of understanding correctly the specific actual circumstances related to the case and is capable of testifying. The tendency to fantasize has not been detected."

Psychologist: When you said that they pushed it, how did you feel?

Girl: Well, I coughed.

Psychologist: OK. And why did you cough?

Girl: Because they pushed it.

Psychologist: And when they pushed it, were you dressed or undressed?

Girl: Dressed and undressed.

Psychologist: Did it hurt?

Girl: It hurt.

Psychologist: Can you show me where it hurt?

Girl: Here (shows her mouth).

Psychologist: When did you last see you mother?

Girl: I haven't seen my mother.

Psychologist: You haven't. Have you been at her place?

Girl: She's lying.

Psychologist: What is she lying about?

Girl: She's lying when she says that Andrius didn't lick me. He did lick me.

Psychologist: Licked you? Can you tell me where he licked you?

Girl: Where my mother lives.

Psychologist: And in which room did he do it?

Girl: Where there are two.

Psychologist: There are two?

Girl: And also in the toilet.

Psychologist: In the toilet?

Girl: And in the bathroom.

Psychologist: Do you remember how the pee pee looked like? Could you draw it? Can you tell me how many times he pushed it in?

Girl: Many times. As long as I stayed there.

Dad made videos...