On 12 December 2018, the suspect’s mother called the emergency number. Shortly before, she had spoken to her son, the suspect, on the phone and realized that he had got into an argument with his American flat mate and had stabbed her in the process. After receiving the distress call, police officers went to the home where they found the bleeding victim. The officers tried to resuscitate her, but she had already passed away.

The suspect has testified that he is unable to remember all of the events of the day in question.  He does remember being upset with his flat mate and that he waited for her in the morning to talk to her. They consequently got into an argument and a struggle between them ensued.

He remembers having held a knife. He doesn’t remember what happened during the argument that followed, what he has done with the knife or whether he stabbed the woman. He does remember seeing the woman lying in blood, in her room. This led to his conclusion that he must have stabbed her.

The suspect has caused the bereaved, particularly the woman’s parents, irrevocable grief. During the hearing, they spoke emotionally, voicing what the loss of their daughter means to them. Many other people connected to the woman have also been heavily emotionally affected by her death. Moreover, the events have caused feelings of insecurity and unrest in society.

Considering the severity of the crime, there is no other option than sentencing a prison sentence. In determining the degree of the sentence, the court takes as principle the indicators that the Court of Appeal in Den Haag applies to manslaughter, which is 8 years’ prison sentence. The extreme violent nature of the crime is an aggravating factor.

Mitigating factors are the suspect’s young age and his extreme diminished capacity when he took the victim’s life. The suspect can therefore not be fully blamed for the proven fact. For these reasons, the court imposes a lower sentence than the 10 years’ prison sentence that was demanded by the public prosecutor, namely 6 years’ prison sentence.

Additionally, the court finds it necessary to impose preventive custody with involuntary treatment as  punitive measure. Considering the severity and unpredictability of the crime, as well as the serious psychological disorders of the suspect, the court deems recidivism of a violent crime very likely. The suspect suffers from chronic disorders that require prolonged treatment and guidance in a clinical setting.

The court is aware that the suspect is young, has no prior record and has proven himself to be cooperative and willing to participate in treatment of his problems. However, treatment in an environment with lower security level than preventive custody with involuntary treatment is considered to be of too much risk.

The danger of recidivism necessitates prolonged custody and treatment, so that in addition, re-education and restriction of freedom will be imposed as punitive measures.