On February 1 of this year, two armed men broke into the shop of a clock and watchmaker in Zwolle. They grabbed the owner and beat and kicked him. A display case with watches was smashed and emptied. The robbers then ran out of the shop and fled in a waiting getaway car. Today, three suspects heard prison sentences - partly conditional - demanded against them.
The three suspects are a 36-year-old man from Deventer, a 44-year-old man from the municipality of Apeldoorn, and a 27-year-old man from The Hague. Investigations have shown that the 36-year-old man and the 27-year-old man were in the shop, while the 44-year-old man waited in the car. The police found a gas pistol, a BB gun, and cartridges during a search of the home of this 44-year-old. The public prosecutor pointed this out in the indictment, as a young child also resided in this home. He also drove the getaway car without a valid drivers license and had cocaine in his possession. The 27-year-old was said to have had the weapon with him, having struck the shop owner and destroyed the display case.
Although the three suspects partly confess, they point fingers at each other regarding who devised the plan for the robbery. For the charged offense of complicity in theft with violence, it does not matter which actions the individual suspects performed. Complicity can be proven if there is close and conscious cooperation.
The public prosecutor emphasized in the indictment the impact the robbery had on the victim. The man was left distraught in the mess caused by the robbers: his little dog fled in fright. The prosecutor also referred to the fact that the man had previously been a victim of a robbery: ‘His safe work and hobby place turned again - just like years ago - into a crime scene in a matter of minutes. Working and practicing his hobby is no longer the same as before,’ said the prosecutor. Even after the previous robbery, the victim exercised his profession in good faith and without any alertness: ‘He never looked up when customers entered, as they were regular customers who had been coming to him for years, or genuinely interested in his unique business. That has changed since February 1, 2025. He now keeps a close watch, he has lost trust and it costs him energy. Energy he would rather spend on repairing clocks and watches. He has also been afraid for a long time that the perpetrators would return, as they did not make much of a haul and there was still much more to take.’
The severity of the offense has been decisive in determining the sentence. The 44-year-old had been in contact with police and justice since his teenage years but had not committed any criminal offenses for a longer period. For this suspect, who was charged with multiple offenses, the public prosecutor deems a prison sentence of 44 months, of which 8 months are appropriate. The 36-year-old and the 27-year-old heard a prison sentence of 38 months, of which 8 months are conditional. A probation period of three years should apply to all suspects, during which special conditions apply.