According to the lawyers of TBS specialist Michel B., the Oostvaarders clinic in Almere has made colossal mistakes in granting leave to their client. The man has confessed to killing a man in Lelystad during his weekend leave in April last year and is on trial in the Central Netherlands court.
On Tuesday, the Public Prosecution Service (OM) demanded a fifteen-year prison sentence and TBS with compulsory nursing against B. for the killing of 72-year-old Gerrit T. in his home in Lelystad.
In their plea, Jan-Jesse Lieftink and Abdel Ytsma of Bureau TBS Advocaten quoted from the draft report, which was drawn up by the Inspectorate of Justice and Security. The final report is expected in October.
According to Lieftink, the preliminary conclusions are “tough as nails and unambiguous”, according to the lawyer. “The Inspectorate concludes that the Oostvaarderskliniek insufficiently directed the rehabilitation process of the person concerned. The shortage of suitable facilities should have been a reason for intensive risk management and direction,” said the lawyer.
In addition, the inspectorate finds “that the Oostvaarders clinic made decisions about the rehabilitation process that were not in accordance with what was required according to risk management,” the lawyer continues.
Lawyer: No supervision of client
Lieftink says in an explanation to NU.nl that the Oostvaarders clinic did not supervise the finances of B. or the people he dealt with, such as co-suspect of the murder of T. in Lelystad, Jan van K. That fifty-year-old man heard eighteen on Tuesday years in prison and TBS and has been sentenced to TBS twice before for his involvement in violent crimes.
This while the inspectorate concludes that B. can be influenced and it was therefore important to keep a good overview of his network.
Lieftink: “We can conclude that B. has not actually received adequate treatment.” The man’s lawyers therefore believe that a nine-year prison sentence is appropriate so that B. can start his treatment after two thirds of his sentence.
Judgment follows September 9
Unlike the Public Prosecution Service, the lawyers see no motive for T.’s death, and this was done on a whim by B. in collaboration with Van K. The court delivered its judgment on 9 September.
–
