The Public Prosecution Service (OM) demands in appeal an 8-month prison sentence, of which 4 are conditional with a probation period of 2 years, and a 5-year professional ban for a man from Harlingen. The OM suspects him of manslaughter.
On August 31, 2022, the defendant was sailing as a skipper on the sailing ship de Risico. Onboard was a group of young students traveling from Terschelling to Vlieland. During the voyage, the boom broke, one of the two wooden parts fell on a 12-year-old girl from The Hague, who died on the spot.
The defendant was responsible as skipper for the safety of the ship and everyone on board. Investigations revealed that the boom of the ship had not been properly maintained. There were long wind cracks in the wood where water could accumulate. As a result, the boom began to rot and broke off. Moreover, the ship should not have set sail because multiple inspection reports had expired.
Unacceptable and Blameworthy Negligence
The attorney general (prosecutor in appeal) said in court today: “If you are aware that the boom has wind cracks on top, which can cause it to take in water, and you know that this boom is potentially a life-threatening device (the boom hangs just above everyone’s head, across the entire ship, and there are considerable forces at play during sailing). And you are responsible for all those people who sail with you in the summer and also for the colleague skippers you allow on your boat with passengers, then you regularly check that boom and have it inspected by an expert. If you don’t do that, it is unacceptable and blameworthy negligence.”
The court convicted the defendant in December 2023 to 150 hours of community service and imposed a conditional prison sentence of 3 months. Both the OM and the defendant appealed.
The OM believes that there is gross negligence. The visible cracks in the boom where water remained caused the boom to rot. The same problem occurred on another ship, the Amicitia, where the mast broke and three people died in 2016. The defendant in this case was an eyewitness to that accident.
After that accident, a branch norm was developed by the skippers of the brown fleet ships. This norm obliges skippers to check very regularly and provides guidelines for such a check. The defendant did not adhere to that norm and did not carry out those checks. Comments from colleagues about the wind cracks in the boom were ignored. According to the OM, he did not take responsibility for the safety on board as expected of a skipper. Therefore, an unconditional prison sentence and professional ban are appropriate according to the OM.
The attorney general (prosecutor in appeal): “This terrible experience for all involved and the lasting loss unfortunately cannot be undone or even slightly compensated. The only thing we can do - and that is what the parents of the victim would like to achieve in her memory - is to try to ensure that such accidents do not happen again.”