“You can think whatever you want without limits, but you cannot act without limits,” said the public prosecutor today during the hearing. A 54-year-old man from Utrecht and a 53-year-old man from Den Dolder are on trial for, among other things, threatening and attempting to extort a bailiff and two police officers. According to the Public Prosecution Service (OM), a severe punishment is warranted. Therefore, the prosecutor is demanding a prison sentence of 40 and 24 months and a contact ban of 3 years for both defendants.
At the end of June 2023, a housing eviction took place in Amsterdam. The two defendants, a 54-year-old man from Utrecht and a 53-year-old man from Den Dolder, disagreed with the eviction. The police were called in. After initially being arrested by the police, they returned to the house. Filming, the men addressed the involved bailiff. It can be heard on video how the men threaten the bailiff by saying that they “will come for him with a sheriff team” and that he “is going to get it.”
Serious Concerns
The bailiff filed a report of threats. However, the story does not stop there. In October of the same year, one of the police officers who was present during the eviction received a visit at the police station in Amsterdam. There, the defendants delivered a letter full of complaints about the police in general and this policeman in particular. They stated that the respective officer is in danger and that they are demanding that he pay a million euros or engage in a conversation and apologize. The defendants also announced in the letter that police officers and their loved ones can expect violence if the officer does not comply with the demands in the letter and that they should be seriously concerned about their safety. On the same day, a second police officer, this time in Nijmegen, received a similar threat letter. He, too, could expect violence if the requested amount of money, in this case, 50,000 euros, is not paid on time.
Threatening Email
In December 2023, the 53-year-old man from Den Dolder sent an email to the police in which he announced violence. One of the measures he claimed would follow is that random police officers would be ambushed and shot dead by masked men. He stated that he condemns violence, but uses it in his demand that the police engage in conversation with him. Therefore, according to the public prosecutor, this constitutes a threat with a terrorist crime.
Aggravating Circumstances
The two defendants are part of the so-called sovereign movement. These are individuals who do not believe that Dutch laws and regulations apply to them. One of the defendants stated on Telegram: “Bailiffs, curators, but also police officers or other officials who misbehave towards me or another, you will all get what’s coming to you.” Although the defendants are free to believe what they want, according to the prosecutor, they have taken many steps further in this case. “The defendants have been systematically and deliberately intimidating people who are simply doing their jobs over an extended period. They have tried to threaten to change the structure of the Netherlands. I find that strongly aggravating.”
Facts
According to the OM, the facts are clear. The defendants do not deny that the things they have done and said have happened. The investigation confirms the facts. For example, the defendants filmed the threats against the bailiff themselves, and the letter for the police officers was found on the computer of both defendants. Additionally, the 53-year-old defendant posted inciting messages via Telegram about a so-called citizens arrest of bailiffs, and a firearm was found with the 54-year-old defendant.
Given the seriousness of the facts and the aggravating circumstances, a severe sentence is appropriate, according to the OM. The OM demands 40 months imprisonment for the 53-year-old defendant, of which 20 months are conditional. The OM demands a prison sentence of 24 months for the 54-year-old defendant, of which 12 months are conditional. For both defendants, if it is up to the OM, a probation period of 3 years will apply. Additionally, the prosecutor demands a contact ban of 3 years, so that the two defendants cannot influence each other to commit criminal offenses during this period.
The court will rule in two weeks.