Employees of a pizzeria in Doetinchem were terrified while working on the evening of September 6, 2024. Suddenly, two men entered: a 19-year-old from Arnhem and a 20-year-old from the municipality of Montferland. They pointed a loaded weapon at the employees and shouted for money. The duo fled with the cash register. The Public Prosecution Service demanded conditional prison sentences against the suspects today in court in Zutphen.
According to the Public Prosecution Service, it is beyond doubt that the two suspects standing trial today committed the robbery. The robbery is entirely captured on camera, employees of the pizzeria have testified about it, and a witness waiting outside for his pizza also saw the robbers. At the moment the suspects fled the crime scene, a shot was fired with the weapon. DNA from the 19-year-old suspect was found on the bullet casing, and the scooter he fled on is registered in his name. The phone number he was using was traced to a mast nearby. The prosecutor stated: “Denying makes no sense, and this suspect does not do that. However, he was not alone. He was with the 20-year-old who also denies any involvement today.”
Description
The 20-year-old told the police that he was packing for a vacation at home, but that statement turned out to be false. The 20-year-old also fits the description of the second suspect. Even the location and shape of the tattoo on his left hand closely resemble what is seen on the footage. In another video taken on that day, three boys on a scooter can be seen, including very likely the two suspects. The two suspects know each other and were together on the day and evening of the robbery. Finally, the involvement of the 20-year-old can be inferred from phone calls the 19-year-old suspect made with his brother and friends from prison during his pre-trial detention. In those calls, he mentioned his co-suspect, whose idea it was “and who is still free.” He also referred to his co-suspect by name, in abbreviation, and by nickname.
The prosecutor stated: “I don’t need to explain to anyone how serious this is. There were relatively young people inside, who work hard to earn some money. And then two scary masked boys come in pointing a firearm at them. Why? Because they want to get money quickly. Not by working hard themselves, but by making the employees extremely afraid. These suspects only thought of themselves.”
Penalty Demand
The probation report indicates that both suspects have since improved their lives. The prosecutor has taken that into account in the penalty demand. “But I absolutely cannot explain to society if these suspects were to serve just a few months in pre-trial detention for this robbery. That would not do justice to the case at all,” she argued in her indictment.
As far as the Public Prosecution Service is concerned, both suspects, who have been released from pre-trial detention, should return to prison. A prison sentence of 24 months, of which 9 months conditional, was demanded against the 19-year-old suspect. With the deduction of the time he has spent in pre-trial detention, he would still have to serve about a year in prison. The 20-year-old faced a prison sentence of 30 months, of which 10 months conditional. The higher sentence is considered appropriate by the prosecutor because this suspect does not take responsibility for his actions.
