The Public Prosecution Service (OM) demands five months unconditional imprisonment against Marco Borsato for committing sexual abuse against a minor girl. The OM suspects that he touched the victims buttocks, breasts, and vagina multiple times, both over and under her clothing. The victim was fifteen years old at the time.
The abuse is said to have taken place around late 2014 and early 2015. The victims mother worked for Marco Borsato during that period, and he often visited their home. The victim had a close bond with the suspect and saw him as her godfather.
In October 2019, the victims mother read about the abuse in her daughters diary and reported it to the police. The victim herself filed a report in December 2021, after which the police, led by the OM, started an investigation.
OM believes the victim
According to the OM, there is sufficient legal and convincing evidence. The victims statement in this case has been assessed as reliable. This is partly because the victim consistently explains what happened. She also mentions specific details and emotions are observed in her.
A reliable statement alone is not enough; there must also be evidence supporting this statement. In this case, that evidence includes audio recordings. In these recordings, the victim and her mother confront the suspect with the allegations. From the suspects reaction, the OM concludes that the suspect partially admits the allegations.
The statements the suspect makes in this criminal investigation are considered unbelievable by the OM. He denies any inappropriate contact with the victim, while the investigation file shows the opposite. For example, the file contains messages the suspect sent to the victim with sexually transgressive content.
Investigation of diary
Furthermore, the victim had already written about the abuse in her diary in 2015. Experts investigated who and when this text was written, after which the OM assessed the diary as reliable supporting evidence.
Based on the file, the OM concludes that the suspect fondled and touched the victim regularly over several months. This happened both over and under her clothing. Because the victim was fifteen years old at the time, this is charged as sexual abuse of a minor.
Completely lost boundary
According to the OM, the suspect completely lost the boundary between right and wrong in his relationship with the victim. There was not only a huge age difference, but the victim also saw the suspect as her godfather after she lost her own father. When the victim began to develop into a young woman during puberty, the suspect abused his position of trust within the family and her vulnerability.
The suspects actions have left deep scars on the victim. “Especially the person you care about and who gives you love and attention touches parts of your body while that is absolutely unwanted,” explains the public prosecutor. “That causes a mental conflict, which has a great impact on a victim.” The fact that the suspect is a celebrity and the victims mother worked for the suspect made it even harder for the victim to speak out.
Media attention
When determining the sentence demand, the severity of the facts, the suspects clean criminal record, and personal circumstances are taken into account. The OM also considers that the case has already been extensively discussed in the media and that the suspects career and personal life have suffered greatly.
At the same time, the suspect could know that not only his successes are widely reported in the media, but also his missteps. Not only the suspect suffers from the enormous attention for this criminal case, but also the victim.
Aggravating circumstances include that the suspect and the victim had a kind of father-daughter relationship. The suspects attitude during the process is also negatively weighed. “Victims of sexual offenses often want recognition,” explains the public prosecutor. “She wants to hear that it is not okay that the adult suspect touched her minor body.” Meanwhile, the suspect places the responsibility on the victim. “According to him, she should have set boundaries, she should have corrected him.”
Time lapse
Besides media attention, the duration of the process also impacts all involved. The police and OM have done much to avoid unnecessary delays. For example, this case was given priority over other sexual offense cases by the police. Sexual offense investigations are often time-consuming, and speed must not come at the expense of thoroughness. Due to extensive investigation, including the victims diary, and hearing those directly involved before the examining judge, it took almost two years before the investigation was completed and a prosecution decision was made.
Afterwards, the defense submitted many additional investigation requests. Because responsibility for the duration of the process does not lie solely with the police, OM, and court, the OM chooses to only partially reduce the sentence demand for the time lapse.
All things considered, the OM demands five months unconditional imprisonment. The court intends to pronounce judgment on December 4.
In principle, the OM does not provide information about the identity of a suspect. This consideration may be different if the (lawyer of the) suspect has previously spoken to the media about the investigation and suspicion. In this case, that is the situation.
