Acquittal for shootings in Almere and Amsterdam
A 22-year-old man from Amsterdam was acquitted of court in Lelystad by the Central Netherlands in two shootings in Almere and Amsterdam in May last year. He was jailed for 10 months for illegal possession of weapons. This sentence is much lower than the nine years demanded by the prosecutor in this case. The attack of the shootings remained unharmed in Almere. In Amsterdam someone was shot in his.
(image from archive)
Doorbell Camera
Images from a doorbell camera from around the time of the shooting in Almere, on May 4, 2020, show that a person walks past, which could possibly be the shooter. The DNA on the casings at the crime scene matches the suspect’s DNA. Three weeks later, on May 23, another shooting takes place, this time in Amsterdam. A man was shot in the head and (possibly) the same weapon was used as in the shooting in Almere. After the shooting in Amsterdam, the suspect’s phone is found on the street.
posture
According to the court, it cannot be proven that the suspect was the suspect in Almere and Amsterdam. He is therefore acquitted of two attempts. If it can be used at all that the person who can be seen on the camera images is the shooter, it cannot be concluded in view of the differences in skin color and posture that it is the suspect, the court finds.
That his DNA was found on the cases, according to reality, he has made a film of the weapon and removed the cartridges from the holder. This video was also found on his phone. Suspect missing about his found phone that he lost during the night that the shooting in Amsterdam also took place. This is confirmed by a witness.
The court finds this statement incomprehensible. It is not clear from the file where exactly and under what circumstances the suspect’s telephone was found. It is remarkable that the bullets from the shooting in Amsterdam (possibly) were sprung with the same weapon as recorded in Almere, but does not prove that the suspect was the shooter.
gun ownership
The court convicted the man for illegal possession of weapons. He confessed that he had a weapon. There are also videos of firearms found on his phone. When imposing the sentence, the court looked at duties. extensions are provided from 8 months granted. The court in this case chooses to impose a 10-month bill. Because the suspect was active in the environment, he must have known that the weapon found with him played a role in criminal activities. He must also serve a four-week pre-confirmed hire.
It verdict.