Out of control revenge against two school kids – Cab driver stands to lose her driver’s license for one year

POSTED: 09/20/12 12:40 PM

GREAT BAY – Wulkiria Liesje G. was close to tears at the prospect of losing her driving license for 12 months yesterday. The 24-year-old cab driver stood trial together with 18-year-old Angel R. for going on a crusade against two schoolboys who had ill-treated R.’s brother (and G.’s cousin) for the umpteenth time at his work. Unfortunately for the two defendants they took out their revenge on the wrong schoolboys on April 3.

Prosecutor mr. Georges van den Eshof demanded 2 years imprisonment against Angel R. and 18 months against Wulkiria G., plus the revocation of her driver’s license for 12 months because she had used her car as a weapon against the two schoolboys. The prosecutor also demanded G.’s immediate imprisonment. That did not happen, because Judge Tamara Tijhuis did not pronounce her verdict immediately but she set the date for sentencing at October 10.

On April 3, Angle R. received a message on his blackberry that his brother had been ill-treated again by students wearing uniforms of the Milton Peters College. The brother had filed several complaints with the police on previous occasions about his tormentors without any result.

The brother got angry and together with Wulkiria G. he set out by car to first meet his brother to learn what had happened and then to return home. On the way back he spotted two students in MPC-uniforms and he ordered Wulkiria G. to stop the car.

But the cab driver drove her car straight onto the two unsuspecting boys and only stopped at the last moment. According to the prosecutor, one of them had to jump aside to avoid getting hit. Angel R. in the meantime had pulled a gun out from underneath his tee-shirt. The cab driver got out of her car, and Angel R. followed, gun in hand. They both chased the two frightened boys into an alley, where Angel R. got into a fight with one of them, hitting him with the butt of his gun on the head.

Prosecutor Van den Eshof considered proven that they drove onto the two boys. “There is no proof that G. knew that R. had a gun, but she still went with him after the victims. I can imagine that the court wants to drop the threat with a weapon for G., but she did drive with her car onto the boys. But this was vigilante justice and the defendants should not have done that.”

The prosecutor asked the court to acquit the defendants of robbing one of the boys of a gold necklace, because apart from the complaint by the victim there is no evidence, and it is quite possible that the necklace broke during the fight with Angel R.

“These facts are very serious,” the prosecutor said. “The defendants went for revenge after two school children and on top they were the wrong ones.”

“I agree with the prosecutor that my client should not have practiced vigilante justice,” R.’s attorney Shaira Bommel said. “But frustration got the better of him. His brother was attacked again at his work by schoolboys, and complaints to the police yielded no results. His objective was to scare the boys.”

mr. Bommel said that her client’s weapon was an alarm gun and not a real weapon. She contested that her client had acted with premeditation. “He did not have the time to think about this.” She asked the court to drop the charges for ill-treatment with a weapon because R. had acted, she said, “under severe emotional stress.”

mr. Hatzmann said that his client Wulkiria G. had been overawed by her six years younger cousin. “She did not dare going against him. What she did with her car was not very clever, but my client did not know anything about the firearm. There was no premeditation because everything went very fast. That she ran after the boys is a matter of adrenaline. It was a stupid and thoughtless action by R. and he regrets it. This was not the intention. My client regrets what happened as well, but fear played a part in her actions.”

mr. Hatzmann objected to the demand to revoke his client’s driver’s license. “That is taking the bread out of her mouth.” He asked the court to impose a conditional prison sentence.

Prosecutor van den Eshof maintained that both defendants had acted with premeditation. “They were looking for the victims,” he said.

Did you like this? Share it:
Out of control revenge against two school kids - Cab driver stands to lose her driver’s license for one year by

Comments are closed.