Prisons and crime in 2017 (updated)

In the last 2 years we have seen many articles named something similar to “The Netherlands has a strange problem: Empty prisons.” which narrates stories where it depicts the Netherlands as an utopia where we don’t have any crime. Of course, these kind of positive messages and viral success stories are nice to read at times, but often I feel that many of these news stories are not as critical towards the subject as need be.

Now, there’s two things I would like to avoid. First of all, I don’t want to be a Pete Hoekstra, who announced that there were no-go areas in the Netherlands (Hoekstra gained more infamy for denying ever saying that after he became Trump’s nominee for ambassador to the Netherlands, while it was broadcasted on PBS. To make matters worse he called the reporter out for creating fake news. Then denying he had actually coined the term ‘fake news’ in the very same interview. Long story short: don’t be Pete. The Netherlands is relatively safe in my experience, and there are no ‘no-go areas’. Secondly, I don’t want to be overly critical of our country approach to sentencing and prisoners. The fact that the Netherlands is in favor of rehabilitation is most likely a primary cause of low incarceration rates in our country, and could work in many other countries.

However, I believe there is more to it when we look at the statistics. For example crime statistics; these have been decreasing for years in the Netherlands, but if you look at more specifically you can see that the biggest decrease, year after year, has been with vandalism, while the decrease in violent crimes has been significantly less.

If we takes statistics from CBS over the period in 2012 – 2016 registered crimes dropped from 1.2 million per year (2012) to 930.000 in 2016 (decrease of almost 25%), but experienced crimes (which is all crimes, reported or unreported) dropped only 12.5% (from 5 million to 4.4 million). Right there and then you also see how large goes unreported. I tried to compare this to other countries, but unfortunately failed to find comparable stats on this.

This kind of statistics also ties into what critics point out when the Netherlands closes down prisons; how well is our system actually in solving crimes? Considering that the number of solved crimes has also gone down in the same period.

This kind of criticism is not really unfounded, since there is a significant sentiment that makes Dutch people feel that these “utopian” articles are in bit of contrast with how they are feeling with the local justice system. Therefore it might be educational to point out some recent cases that in my opinion show a certain weakness in the approach of how crime is combatted.

Familial DNA: the technique of finding a perpetrator by using DNA of a family member to narrow down your pool of suspects was first used in the UK in 2003. In 2017 the Netherlands had its first case solved by using this technique. In the case of Milica van Doorn (who was killed in 1991), they tested approximately 125 men to trace it back to one suspect. Given the fact that this pool was so small, it implicates that law enforcement had a very good idea of who they were looking for, but were not able to prosecute, but still took a very long time to utilize a proven technique. In the United States there is a lot of questions about the ViCap database, and these kind of cases make you wonder about the Dutch database storing DNA for example.

Another story, that is marginally reported in (even) the Dutch news are the murder of Mirela Mos and Sabrina Oosterbeek. Mirela was a Romanian immigrant murdered in 2004, and Sabrina disappeared in 2017. In Sabrina’s case a suspect was found, who was already a suspect in the Mirela Mos case. Stranger is that forensic research in 2014 already came out that the suspect’s DNA was found on the garbage bags that Mirela Mos was found in. In the meantime, the same suspect is already connected to a 2003 murder. All three women have been reported as drug-addicted prostitutes. This in particular shows similarities, to many other famous cases, where this marginalized group fell victim to perpetrators that were never really chased for their crimes to begin with. If this suspect turns out to be guilty, one can only wonder how many other victims he has made in 14 year interim.

Recidivism and mental health is another topic that comes to mind. Most recently, the case of Anne Faber, who was raped and murdered after a accidental encounter. The perpetrator was institutionalized at the time of the attack in a half way house, working on his return into society. In 2010 this particular individual was sentenced to 12 years in jail for violently raping 2 teenage girls.

That a criminal gets another chance in society is not something I would like to argue, it is not what is particular strange in this case. What is strange, is the legal context that made the situation as is. First of all, one might ask, if you get 12 years why is someone out in 7, to the extend that he can do such a horrendous act, but was also able to hide the victim well enough (the attack happened less then one kilometer away from the half way house) for it not to be discovered for weeks. This return to society comes including the fact that this individual was never actually treated for any mental health issues or personality disorders to begin with.

Basically, if you find yourself in a situation in which the perpetrator found himself in 2010, any good lawyer advises you not to cooperate with a psych evaluation, which automatically means you will not have to enter a TBS-program. This program shortly explained, facilitates your return into society, while giving you treatment for disorders or other issues. It is maybe comparable to a parole-arrangement of sorts. The TBS will stay on as long a panel of experts feel it is necessary.

So in this case, the accused does not cooperate, and is still out and about 7 years after the offense. Being a high profile case, this upsets many, especially given the violent history of the offender, which extends largely next to the rapes in 2010. To make matters worse, his original sentence was 16 years, which was appealed by the justice department to get it down to 12.

If you don’t close loopholes like this really fast, you lose support for a system of rehabilitation real quick. Especially with these kinds of examples, the feeling of safety is not really measured by whether our prisons are empty. Where the focus of rehabilitation is often accepted as a good practice in the Netherlands, but especially heinous convicts, like the one mentioned, create grounds for criticism. For example the case of a father, convicted of raping his own daughter, who after his sentence regained custody of his youngest daughter, and ends up fathering a child with said daughter, who was only 11. these cases do not happen everyday, but often enough to to discuss whether rehabilitation is not for everyone.

Another topic that will add to the debate about safety is the amount executions in Amsterdam. Since 2012, a violent executions have been frequent in the capital city. These are related to an ongoing conflict between 2 rivalry groups. Nothing new about that, it is more the lack of efficiency of law enforcement. It seems, supported through media reports, that investigators are very well aware of who is participating, but they are unable to stop the violence. Just a simple timeline deduction gives you the following figures: 35 deaths (3 of these seem to be the victim of mistaken identity and wrongfully murdered), many more known suspects or accomplices (around at least 65 to one news report, some who are also counted in the death toll) and only 15 arrests. In 5 years time, this not give you a great track record. As one can see, 35 executions in less than 5 years makes for big headlines.

There are more contemporary stories that will support the idea I am trying to convey, which could be supplemented in a later post. However, the main argument is that empty prison reflect a safe society. In the case of the Netherlands it stops the ambition to really do better and increase law enforcement techniques and to close loopholes in the law. In the end,  the main lesson is: don’t believe everything you see on the internet.

Update 17/07/2018: the murderer of Anne Faber received a sentence of 28 years with addition of TBS. This is similar to what the prosecution has demanded. Life in prison was not demanded, or given, since it would give the possibility for him to be released after 25 years without TBS. The sentence of 28 years, he could likely “get out” in 23 years. but than he still needs to be rehabilitated through the TBS-system, which can indefinitely delay return into society.

Some experts discuss the viability of this choice; questioning whether after such a long sentence, rehabilitation is even possible. They argue that this choice is made to keep the prisoner incarcerated indefinitely, while TBS is supposed to aim for return in society.

Since Anne’s murder, more judges see the need for the TBS added sentence, instead of their previous practice of being cautious with this kind of sentencing, especially if a perpatrator refused to cooperate with a psychological exam. Which is exactly how the convicted was able to be set free at the time of the murder.