Five of them had previously been given prison sentences by the court in Middelburg, ranging from 4.5 to 5 years. One suspect was acquitted. The five suspects themselves appealed, and the Public Prosecution Service appealed against the acquittal of the sixth suspect.
If it were up to the Public Prosecution Service, all six would go to jail. During the appeal, sentences of four years and four months to five years were requested. The five-year demand was against the previously acquitted suspect. In addition, the Public Prosecution Service is demanding compensation of 380,000 euros; 4,000 euros for the victims and the rest for organizer Hrieps.
The Public Prosecution Service believes that there was close and conscious cooperation between all suspects. “A plan was devised in which everyone had a role and shared in the loot,” the Public Prosecution Service said. “Everything can be proven legally and convincingly. The 79-year-old woman and her grandchild have suffered trauma, but I have not heard any excuses from the suspects.”
The earlier acquittal of the 36-year-old suspect particularly stings the Public Prosecution Service. “DNA evidence was found on a bag that was left behind after the robbery in the yard of the house. He was always there at crucial moments, had contact with the co-suspects around the robbery and was present when the loot was divided.”
The suspects’ lawyers believe the evidence is too thin to convict their clients. They seriously doubt the witness statements and ask for their clients to be acquitted during the appeal. “The DNA traces found on the sports bags found do not prove that the suspects were present during the robbery,” argues one of the lawyers.
According to the lawyers, the only direct evidence is the paving stone that was thrown through the door and that the three perpetrators were wearing balaclavas. But they were otherwise unrecognizable. The lawyers also have explanations for the lavish expenditure. For example, one person allegedly received more than 8,000 euros for unjustified detention, another had won at gambling and another suspect had received a gift from his father.
But the releases do raise eyebrows. For example, a Mercedes was purchased, a Breitling watch was purchased, a holiday was booked to Spain and a night was spent in the Amsterdam Hilton, and money was given to an acquaintance.
If a penalty must be imposed, it should be a significantly lower penalty than previously imposed, the lawyers believe. During the robbery, only threats of violence were made. “It was nothing more than a theft with forced entry,” the defense said.
The aftermath of the robbery remains palpable for the victims. The now 79-year-old mother of organizer Hugo Kramer and the now 8-year-old daughter of Hugo Kramer still feel unsafe. “It is a black page. We still deal with it almost every day and will not forget it for the rest of our lives,” Kramer read during the appeal.
