Conflict with fatal outcome: Up to 24 years imprisonment demanded against couple from Dronten

News report | 16-01-2026 | 12:43

“They are here,” says the female suspect to her husband as the neighbors car arrives that afternoon. The suspects doorbell camera shows how the couple waits for the neighbors outside. An argument breaks out almost immediately. It is clear that the neighbors have had a long-standing dispute. Then it seems enough for the female suspect. “Maté,” she says in Papiamento to her husband. In other words: kill him/her.

“Because of you this happened!”

The male suspect reacts. He starts shooting at the two victims closest to him. Then he walks to the car where the third victim is still sitting. This victim is also shot. After reloading his weapon, he shoots again at the first two victims, who are already lying on the ground as if dead. The third victim, still in the car, begs the female suspect to call 112. However, she does the opposite. She keeps shouting at him until her husband shoots the victim dead. Shortly after the incident, the male suspect himself calls the police. “I have shot three people dead,” he says. The doorbell camera shows how his wife addresses one of the victims on the street: “Because of you this happened!”

Together

“The suspects act together,” states the public prosecutor in court. “She says ‘shoot’, he shoots. She points to the third victim, he goes to the third victim. She shouts ‘maté’ when he is at the third victim, he shoots the third victim.” That the suspect later claims not to have heard his wife is not plausible according to the OM. The repeated call of the woman is clearly audible on the doorbell camera footage.

Premeditation

According to the OM, there is also premeditation. “The weapon was not taken for protection, as the suspect stated,” says the prosecutor. “It was taken for the attack.” Camera footage shows that the three victims tried to calm the situation shortly before and during the incident. Furthermore, there is no evidence that either suspect was surprised or protested against what happened. On the contrary: even when the three victims were already helpless on the street, two of them were shot again.

Execution

The prosecutor is clear about the severity of the facts. “The suspects carried out an execution. In broad daylight near a playground in a residential area. In front of the house where their own daughter was present. They deprived the deceased victim of his greatest right, the right to life. The other victims are physically and psychologically damaged for the rest of their lives.”

According to the OM, only an unconditional custodial sentence is appropriate for both suspects. The OM also takes into account that experts have diagnosed PTSD and a depressive disorder in the male suspect. They therefore advise attributing the facts (at least) with diminished responsibility to this suspect. Against the 49-year-old suspect from Dronten, the OM demands 24 years imprisonment. The OM also demands TBS with compulsory treatment against this suspect. The 47-year-old suspect from Dronten is, according to the OM, to receive a prison sentence of 15 years. Finally, the OM asks the court to impose behavioral influencing measures on both suspects.

The court will pronounce its verdict on February 13, 2026.