Back to October 30, 2022. In the Viooltjesstraat in Ham, the now 65-year-old Bruno B. stabs his ex-son-in-law Tim Wils (40) to death. With a fillet knife. The man, who used to run a butcher’s shop in Heppen (Leopoldsburg), has been at odds with his daughter’s former sweetheart for years. The end of the relationship was tumultuous. Wils was even given a restraining order. Two days after the ban expired, the Olmen resident stood at the door of his former parents-in-law.
Pellet stove
“To claim his things,” said Philip Daeninck, lawyer for the surviving relatives. Tim Wils came to reclaim many of his own goods, including a pellet stove. He did this with a stick in his hands. He didn’t get further than the entrance hall.
Bruno B. struck twice with a fillet knife. The first time the victim was able to fend off the attack. The next time the knife plunged into Tim Wils’ heart region. Not much later, his death was diagnosed in hospital.
Victim Tim Wils. — © rr
“Do not agree with”
The public prosecutor’s office investigated murder. The ultimate conclusion would be murder with incitement for which Bruno B. must answer. The case is currently not before the assizes, but before the criminal court.
“I completely disagree with that,” Philip Daeninck said in the Hasselt criminal court on Friday. He strongly disputed that it was a matter of incitement. Partly because Bruno B. withheld goods from the victim. “This is murder. Then it is up to a people’s jury or assizes to judge this. Now the Public Prosecution Service is trying to take a shortcut to have the case tried more quickly. A case for assizes requires a completely different investigation than a correctional file.”
© rr
Calling witnesses
Daeninck claims that the investigation has not been fully conducted. He asked to call four witnesses: two workmates, a family member and a friend. “If you rule that there is no incitement, the criminal court has no jurisdiction and the case must appear for assizes,” said the lawyer.
The defense through Joke Feytons, on the other hand, wants to weaken the charges and speaks of legal self-defense and even of inflicting assault and battery. If the judge were to follow Daeninck, the file would have to be moved to the assizes in Tongeren. But… “Can you still dispute the incitement if you have not done so at an earlier stage or before the council chamber,” the judge pointed out. A move that Daeninck felt coming. “For strategic reasons I didn’t do that.”
The court has now postponed the case to June 21 to argue whether the challenge about the incitement is still possible.
){kind=link}