Reader’s letter: Amazing

POSTED: 09/20/12 12:42 PM

Dear Mr. Editor:

With consternation I read Today (Sept 19, 2012) about our judges and their thinking in the case of 2 “gypsy-bandits/Regatta-Killers.”

Victims robbed violently…
One victim raped several times…
Six men were robbed and three of them killed atrociously….
Victims severely beaten, stabbed and stoned….
One victim’s shirt was set on fire while he was still alive, causing third degree burns…
Orgies of violence…
Recidivism highly likely…
Antisocial development with psychopathic tendencies
Forensic assessment concludes that alcohol addicted man could be held fully accountable…

Yet our appeals court judges were reluctant to impose life sentences because the current law does not contain a provision for early release after 20 years and “because both suspects are still relatively young”! So they commute the life sentences to 30 years instead and now in 20 years early release can be possible.

With all respect for our court, what are our judges thinking???

These criminals should consider themselves lucky that the Dutch judicial system does not allow the death penalty, nor that they could have been given 3 consecutive life sentences with no time off for good behavior for the horrible life’s path they chose, thereby inflicting immeasurable pain and agony on other persons and their families. The raped lady will have to live with the horrible memories of what they did to her for the rest of her life (no switching the memories off in 20 years) and the three killed men will definitely still be very dead, even 20 years from now.

Our judges continue to be the nicest guys (and gals) a criminal would want to meet.


Michael J. Ferrier


Editor’s note:

We understand the author’s frustration and anger. However, in our opinion it is incorrect to blame the judges for their court ruling. The people who inspired this decision are the fifteen members of parliament who, in their eternal wisdom, decided in May to take article 28 out of the draft criminal code. This article denies convicts with a life sentence the right to a review of their sentence after 20 years. As we wrote yesterday, this most likely brought the judges to the conclusion that the social and political climate in St. Maarten does not favor acknowledging this right to a review, let alone the right to a pardon. So our politicians took a shortsighted decision to show that they are tough on crime without realizing that this decision would backfire. And backfire it did. So while our judges could be the nicest guys and gals on the planet, our parliamentarians beat them in the field of shortsightedness.

Did you like this? Share it:
Reader's letter: Amazing by

Comments are closed.