Heavy sentences demanded in Galápagos case following deadly shooting at Club Rush

KRALENDIJK – More than a year after the deadly shooting at Club Rush, the Galápagos criminal case has been extensively heard on its merits. Several groups of young people stood trial for their role in the extreme gun violence on the night that 15-year-old Clayshenou D. was killed. Prison sentences of many years have been demanded against the main suspects.

The wide-ranging case did not revolve solely around the shooting directly outside Club Rush. About half an hour later, gun violence broke out again in Noord Saliña. The Public Prosecution Service considers a large part of the events that night to be interconnected.

According to information from the prosecution, a total of nearly eighteen suspects were arrested in connection with the investigation. For the KPCN, Galápagos is, according to Daan Smits, the prosecutor involved, probably one of the largest, if not the largest, criminal investigations the force has ever conducted on Bonaire in terms of the number of suspects. Among other things, 600GB of footage was analysed. During the court hearings, a compilation of the most important camera images was shown.

Three groups

During the substantive hearing, the prosecution broadly divided the suspects from the case file into three groups: Noord Saliña, Den tera (Antriol) and Tera Kòrá. The cases of these groups were heard on separate court days.

The most serious suspicion rests with two young men from Noord Saliña. The prosecution suspects them of being jointly responsible for the fatal shooting of Clayshenou D.

One of them was 15 years old at the time of the shooting. Against the other suspect, Gedion O., a prison sentence of 24 years has been demanded. The two have now been in pre-trial detention for more than a year.

According to the prosecution’s legal reasoning, it does not necessarily need to prove which weapon fired the fatal bullet. If it can be shown that two suspects consciously and closely cooperated in shooting at the victim, both can be held responsible for complicity in manslaughter.

Crucial anonymous witness

A special role in the evidence is played by an anonymous threatened witness, referred to in the case file as witness X.

The identity of this person is so thoroughly protected that even the presiding prosecutor, the KPCN investigation team, the defence lawyers and the judge do not know who it is. The witness states that they were present and saw both main suspects firing in the direction of Clayshenou D.

According to the witness, the 15-year-old fell to the ground after being shot by the juvenile suspect. The prosecution simultaneously stresses that this statement cannot serve as the sole piece of evidence and must therefore be assessed in conjunction with other means of proof.

The defence contests the evidence.

Defence lawyer Selvin Larmonie argued during his plea, according to Extra Bonaire, that the prosecution has been unable to prove that his client Gedion O. fired the fatal shot.

The juvenile main suspect also denies being responsible for the death of Clayshenou D.

Extra Bonaire recorded his final words on the last day of the hearing. The now 16-year-old suspect maintained before the judge that he did not kill Clayshenou D. and asked for his freedom back.

His lawyer Marga van Lieshout also raised serious questions about a report by the Child Protection Council concerning the juvenile. Extra Bonaire covered this separately during the proceedings.

Unique PIJ measure

The prosecution has demanded one year of juvenile detention and a PIJ measure against the juvenile suspect. The one-year juvenile detention is, given his age at the time of the offence, the maximum sentence that can be imposed under juvenile criminal law. A prison sentence cannot be imposed on a juvenile.

A PIJ measure is comparable to juvenile TBS (compulsory psychiatric treatment) and is aimed at intensive and long-term treatment over two years, with the possibility that the measure can be extended by the judge. Bonaire does not yet have a facility where such a measure can be carried out. JICN is said to be working on plans to make closed-door treatment on Bonaire possible in the future. The prosecution therefore wishes, if the judge imposes the measure, to have the treatment carried out in the European Netherlands. Should the judge adopt the demand and send the suspect to the Netherlands, it would be the first time in history.

Revenge attack in Noord Saliña

The case did not end with the violence outside Club Rush. According to the prosecution, the other group from Den tera, led by the brother of the deceased victim, began calling each other shortly after the shooting. They agreed on where to meet, and firearms and ammunition were reportedly arranged.

Three suspects then drove in a white Toyota to Noord Saliña. There they allegedly searched for the other group and opened fire again. The car was also shot at in return.

The prosecution is charging the three occupants with, among other things, attempted murder. Prison sentences of fourteen, sixteen and eighteen years have been demanded against them.

Lower demands too

Not every suspect is accused of involvement in the death of Clayshenou D. or the subsequent revenge attack. Other suspects have been prosecuted primarily because they fired weapons at other locations.

For two of these suspects, the demands are considerably lower: three years and thirty months in prison respectively. According to the prosecution, their role was smaller, but they too contributed to the escalation of that night through their use of firearms.

Marion S., the stepfather of the Noord Saliña suspect, also stood trial. Extra Bonaire reported that the prosecution has demanded six years in prison against him. The defence requested an acquittal for the shooting of a victim.

Many questions for the judge

After an investigation of approximately one year, not every detail of that night has been clarified. Many suspects remained silent, and witnesses too were often unwilling to make statements, according to the prosecution.

The judge must now determine, among other things, how much weight can be attached to the statement of the anonymous witness, whether complicity has been established, and which suspects should be tried under adult or juvenile criminal law.

The verdict is expected in October.