Officer in the Hague shoots axe wielding man in the chest, he is going to be prosecuted

[Peter King]

While a 36 year old man is waving with an axe a police officer shot him in the chest. Prosecution not convinced of self defense.

An agent who shot a suspect in the Neptunusstreet in the Hague is going to be prosecuted by the prosecutors office. The police officer shot the man while he was waving around an axe. The prosecution however is not convinced of imminent danger.

The 36 year old man was walking through Scheveningen (a neighborhood in the Hague) in May of 2020 and his behavior seemed to be one of a man with mental issues. He was hitting doors with the axe and had injured 2 people on the street. Officers who had rushed to the scene took their weapons out of their holsters and ordered the suspect to surrender.

The man did not respond to any directions given by the police. At a certain moment the officer aimed, according to his own statements, at the stomach of the suspect. He hit the man in the chest. The suspect was seriously injured and transported to the hospital. The officer said he shot out of self defense because the man with the axe was an imminent threat to a fellow officer.

As usual in cases where an officer used his weapon to target and hit someone, an investigation is done by the National Detective unit. During the investigation into the shooting, the National Detective Unit staged a reconstruction of the shooting incident in the Neptunusstreet (last November). The investigation has been concluded and studied in detail by the prosecution office (OM), this was reported today.

The prosecution is of the opinion that there are insufficient clues to view this as a case of self defense. Because of this decision the officer will have to stand trial, The prosecution thinks it is important to have a judicial verdict in this case.

When the case will go to trial is yet to be decided.

The Dutch article this translation was based on.


I think it is a very good decision of the prosecution to make. Officers are in principle the only people in the Netherlands who have the authority to legally use deadly force. But that use of deadly force needs to be justified and appropriate. We cannot have officers just go and shoot people without there being a very good reason for it. Especially because the officer who he said was in danger did not feel the need to shoot his weapon. The officer did not give off a warning shot to try and make the person listen and comply and he shot immediately at the core of the person, the region of the body that is most likely to lead to fatalities. In the Netherlands officers are also trained to shoot out the leg so that the thread is neutralized.

We are going to have to wait and see what the judges will decide (because this will be done by a 3 judge panel).

 

[Crovax]

I think it is a very good decision of the prosecution to make. Officers are in principle the only people in the Netherlands who have the authority to legally use deadly force. But that use of deadly force needs to be justified and appropriate. We cannot have officers just go and shoot people without there being a very good reason for it. Especially because the officer who he said was in danger did not feel the need to shoot his weapon. The officer did not give off a warning shot to try and make the person listen and comply and he shot immediately at the core of the person, the region of the body that is most likely to lead to fatalities. In the Netherlands officers are also trained to shoot out the leg so that the thread is neutralized.

Two questions

Are officers required to fire a warning shot?

Why are officers trained to shoot the legs? They are harder to hit and will not stop the target from inflicting damage

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Just more evidence of how decadent European societies will continue to fall further. At the point where police are issued deadly force yet prosecuted for using it against a clear deadly force threat.

This is someone who should actually be eligible for asylum against political persecution.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Two questions

Are officers required to fire a warning shot?

Why are officers trained to shoot the legs? They are harder to hit and will not stop the target from inflicting damage

Apparently the prosecution is actually arguing that the police officer is guilty because he didn’t just fire a wild shot into an urban area to “warn” a violent and irrational axe weilding criminal.

Apparently now leftist ignorance of firearms and demand for their irresponsible use is law in the Netherlands. I guess though the cop would’ve been ok if he shot the suspect in the leg and cut his femoral artery and caused him to die from blood loss?

So in Holland coos either have to send a wild shot into an urban area and risk hurting someone innocent or kill people slower and more painfully with a leg shot, that might also miss and an injure uninvolved parties

 

[EMNofSeattle]

While a 36 year old man is waving with an axe a police officer shot him in the chest. Prosecution not convinced of self defense.

An agent who shot a suspect in the Neptunusstreet in the Hague is going to be prosecuted by the prosecutors office. The police officer shot the man while he was waving around an axe. The prosecution however is not convinced of imminent danger.

The 36 year old man was walking through Scheveningen (a neighborhood in the Hague) in May of 2020 and his behavior seemed to be one of a man with mental issues. He was hitting doors with the axe and had injured 2 people on the street. Officers who had rushed to the scene took their weapons out of their holsters and ordered the suspect to surrender.

The man did not respond to any directions given by the police. At a certain moment the officer aimed, according to his own statements, at the stomach of the suspect. He hit the man in the chest. The suspect was seriously injured and transported to the hospital. The officer said he shot out of self defense because the man with the axe was an imminent threat to a fellow officer.

As usual in cases where an officer used his weapon to target and hit someone, an investigation is done by the National Detective unit. During the investigation into the shooting, the National Detective Unit staged a reconstruction of the shooting incident in the Neptunusstreet (last November). The investigation has been concluded and studied in detail by the prosecution office (OM), this was reported today.

The prosecution is of the opinion that there are insufficient clues to view this as a case of self defense. Because of this decision the officer will have to stand trial, The prosecution thinks it is important to have a judicial verdict in this case.

When the case will go to trial is yet to be decided.

The Dutch article this translation was based on.


I think it is a very good decision of the prosecution to make. Officers are in principle the only people in the Netherlands who have the authority to legally use deadly force. But that use of deadly force needs to be justified and appropriate. We cannot have officers just go and shoot people without there being a very good reason for it. Especially because the officer who he said was in danger did not feel the need to shoot his weapon. The officer did not give off a warning shot to try and make the person listen and comply and he shot immediately at the core of the person, the region of the body that is most likely to lead to fatalities. In the Netherlands officers are also trained to shoot out the leg so that the thread is neutralized.

We are going to have to wait and see what the judges will decide (because this will be done by a 3 judge panel).

It sounds like Dutch use of force law is six kinds of messed up and is impossible to comply with.

Warning shots are dumb, they only lead to wild shots which endanger others, shooting for the leg is as fatal as shooting the chest, the biggest artery in the human body is in the leg, and it’s harder to hit meaning risk of bystander injury.

The bolded part is even stupider because it places the burden on the firing officer to read the mind of the other officer and assume the other officer sees everything exactly as the shooter does. Which is unfair, and irrelevant to the state of mind of the shooting officer.

This looks like The Netherlands is a dictatorial regime without rule of law if you can put someone in prison over someones state of mind.

 

[Peter King]

Two questions

Are officers required to fire a warning shot?

Why are officers trained to shoot the legs? They are harder to hit and will not stop the target from inflicting damage

Require not I think. But this is the police instructions about warning shots.

- The officer warns immediately before he can fire his weapon to target the suspect. Not of course in case of sniper rifles. The officer will warn the suspect that he is going to shoot. This warning has to be given with a loud voice or any other means that makes it beyond doubt that a shot will be fire if the orders are not followed forthwith. This verbal warning can be replaced by a warning shot, the only time when this warning does not have to be given is when the circumstances make a verbal or warning shot impossible.

- A warning shot has to be fired in such a manner that risk to people and property is avoided as much as possible.

And officers are trained to shoot the legs if there is no case of fire weapons (then they are allowed to shoot to the core of the body). If there is a knife or a pocket knife or something like that and the person is at such a distance that danger is not imminent then the rule is that officers try and prevent shooting at the core of the body.

After the shooting I have seen officers first cuffing a suspect and then waiting at times until ambulance/fire department is there to make life saving attempts in order to save the suspects life.

In the Netherlands the work instruction of the police states that immediately after using deadly force against a suspect it is the duty of the police to immediately work to save the suspects life. In fact it says that after the gun incident the first duty of the officer is to save the suspects life.

 

[Peter King]

Just more evidence of how decadent European societies will continue to fall further. At the point where police are issued deadly force yet prosecuted for using it against a clear deadly force threat.

This is someone who should actually be eligible for asylum against political persecution.

That is nonsense, this does not have anything to do with "decadence" but with the legal system which also respects the life of a suspect even if they had to fire on him.

It is not the Netherlands that has a problem here, I would say it is the other way around, too many police officers in the US get away with deadly shootings IMO.

 

[Peter King]

Apparently the prosecution is actually arguing that the police officer is guilty because he didn’t just fire a wild shot into an urban area to “warn” a violent and irrational axe weilding criminal.

Apparently now leftist ignorance of firearms and demand for their irresponsible use is law in the Netherlands. I guess though the cop would’ve been ok if he shot the suspect in the leg and cut his femoral artery and caused him to die from blood loss?

So in Holland coos either have to send a wild shot into an urban area and risk hurting someone innocent or kill people slower and more painfully with a leg shot, that might also miss and an injure uninvolved parties

1. you do know the principle of justice right? The officer is innocent until proven otherwise.
2. You are clearly unaware that these rules are made by right wing governments in the Netherlands
3. guess what,

Compared to the Netherlands the US has 271 times more police officers per capita than the Netherlands
Compared to the Netherlands the US has 10 times as many murders per capita
Compare to the Netherlands, the US has a rape rate three times higher than the Netherlands
Robberies in the US 75% more than the Netherlands
The US imprisons 6 times as many people as the Netherlands does but still violent crimes in the Netherlands are way less than in the US, even though you imprison people at a much higher rate than we do and has 271 times as many officers per capita than the Netherlands.

Per capita police shoot about 10 times as many people to death as are shot to death in the Netherlands, so who has the bigger problem here? We in the Netherlands (there is no country holland) or the US.

 

[Peter King]

It sounds like Dutch use of force law is six kinds of messed up and is impossible to comply with.

Warning shots are dumb, they only lead to wild shots which endanger others, shooting for the leg is as fatal as shooting the chest, the biggest artery in the human body is in the leg, and it’s harder to hit meaning risk of bystander injury.

Which is your opinion, but guess which country has more of an issue with police brutality and violence, and guess what, it is not the Netherlands.

The bolded part is even stupider because it places the burden on the firing officer to read the mind of the other officer and assume the other officer sees everything exactly as the shooter does. Which is unfair, and irrelevant to the state of mind of the shooting officer.

Really? Yeah, the bolded text is quite obvious, the officer who was supposed to at risk that the other officer shot the suspect, did not fire himself. I do not know why that was, but I assume this will come out in the trial.

This looks like The Netherlands is a dictatorial regime without rule of law if you can put someone in prison over someones state of mind.

1. this is one of the most nonsensical comments I have ever read on this website and that is very telling IMO.
2. you do know he is just a suspect and will be defended in court and will have his opportunity to present his views to the court? And that it is up to the prosecution to prove that he did something wrong? Being innocent until proven otherwise is the rule of law in the Netherlands.
3. who the hell says someone is going to get imprisoned over "someone's state of mind". That is just total nonsense, he is standing trial for his decisions and actions, not his or anybody else's state of mind.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Which is your opinion, but guess which country has more of an issue with police brutality and violence, and guess what, it is not the Netherlands.

Which is not relevant to this case, if the US was comprised of Dutch people it would have lower crime.

Really? Yeah, the bolded text is quite obvious, the officer who was supposed to at risk that the other officer shot the suspect, did not fire himself. I do not know why that was, but I assume this will come out in the trial.

But your own post claims this is being used as evidence against the officer. Which is stupid because the state of mind of the other officer is not relevant to why the officer chose to fire.

1. this is one of the most nonsensical comments I have ever read on this website and that is very telling IMO.
2. you do know he is just a suspect and will be defended in court and will have his opportunity to present his views to the court?

To judges who recieve their salary from the same place as the prosecutors and are parts of the liberal elite. Much inferior to a jury system where you can appeal to common people who don’t operate in theoretical terms.

And that it is up to the prosecution to prove that he did something wrong?

To a judge, who likely was a prosecutor first

Being innocent until proven otherwise is the rule of law in the Netherlands.
3. who the hell says someone is going to get imprisoned over "someone's state of mind". That is just total nonsense, he is standing trial for his decisions and actions, not his or anybody else's state of mind.

If they’re using the state of mind of the other officer as evidence then they are looking to put him in prison for someone else’s state of mind

 

[CaughtInThe]

What is all the evidence that will be presented in the case?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

1. you do know the principle of justice right? The officer is innocent until proven otherwise.
2. You are clearly unaware that these rules are made by right wing governments in the Netherlands
3. guess what,

Compared to the Netherlands the US has 271 times more police officers per capita than the Netherlands
Compared to the Netherlands the US has 10 times as many murders per capita
Compare to the Netherlands, the US has a rape rate three times higher than the Netherlands
Robberies in the US 75% more than the Netherlands
The US imprisons 6 times as many people as the Netherlands does but still violent crimes in the Netherlands are way less than in the US, even though you imprison people at a much higher rate than we do and has 271 times as many officers per capita than the Netherlands.

Per capita police shoot about 10 times as many people to death as are shot to death in the Netherlands, so who has the bigger problem here? We in the Netherlands (there is no country holland) or the US.

All of these statistics are irrelevant to principes of justice. The fact people in Holland commit fewer crimes then people in the US is not evidence of the fact the Justice system in Holland is fair

 

[Lutherf]

We are talking about Europe here. It probably would have been best to have the axe guy kill a few people before anyone was sure he was a threat. I mean, the injured people might feel a little differently but they are only injured and don't count. Maybe the cops should be required to write a sternly worded letter or two before using an direct force...normal font, naturally. We don't want to provoke the guy by using bold face or capital letters.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

We are talking about Europe here. It probably would have been best to have the axe guy kill a few people before anyone was sure he was a threat. I mean, the injured people might feel a little differently but they are only injured and don't count. Maybe the cops should be required to write a sternly worded letter or two before using an direct force...normal font, naturally. We don't want to provoke the guy by using bold face or capital letters.

Even if he did kill people he might not be a real threat when the police arrive and besides he’s just misunderstood

 

[Lutherf]

Even if he did kill people he might not be a real threat when the police arrive and besides he’s just misunderstood

Well, legally, if he was just sitting there in a mess of hacked up body parts and gnawing on a finger bone when the cops showed up he would NOT be an imminent threat even over here. According to the OP, however, he was waving the axe and had already injured at least two people so any move toward the cop was probably completely justified, at least on this side of the pond.

 

[Peter King]

Which is not relevant to this case, if the US was comprised of Dutch people it would have lower crime.

I think more it is because we have another society than the US society, not because our "Dutch nationality".

But your own post claims this is being used as evidence against the officer. Which is stupid because the state of mind of the other officer is not relevant to why the officer chose to fire.

Actually as that part is written below the article and normally the person who writes the story gives his opinion or things that the OP thought were interesting. So clearly it was my view that it was remarkable that the person he supposedly was being a deadly threat too did not shoot his gun. The decision to prosecute was done as the result of the investigation, forensics, witness accounts and the re-enactment of the shooting.

To judges who recieve their salary from the same place as the prosecutors and are parts of the liberal elite. Much inferior to a jury system where you can appeal to common people who don’t operate in theoretical terms.

More arrogant nonsense without any evidence. I think the panel of judges system is far superior to the jury system. At least in the Netherlands lawyers will not grandstand because there is no audience (aka the Jury) that need to be impressed by their "show".

And judges are not liberal or conservative, they are chosen because of proven competency, not because of their political views.

To a judge, who likely was a prosecutor first

No, you just do an internship with the prosecutors office. Normally you are a lawyer first. And don't US judges often also start as prosecutors? So I am not sure what you are trying to unsuccessfully imply here.

If they’re using the state of mind of the other officer as evidence then they are looking to put him in prison for someone else’s state of mind

You do not seem to understand the basics of the law it seems, in the US other officers are also questioned for their opinion or what they witnessed.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I think more it is because we have another society than the US society, not because our "Dutch nationality".

Dutch ethnicity, not nationality. The people predate the existence of the state

Actually as that part is written below the article and normally the person who writes the story gives his opinion or things that the OP thought were interesting. So clearly it was my view that it was remarkable that the person he supposedly was being a deadly threat too did not shoot his gun. The decision to prosecute was done as the result of the investigation, forensics, witness accounts and the re-enactment of the shooting.

Yeah, except you saw it as relevant to include this.

More arrogant nonsense without any evidence. I think the panel of judges system is far superior to the jury system. At least in the Netherlands lawyers will not grandstand because there is no audience (aka the Jury) that need to be impressed by their "show".

And judges are not liberal or conservative, they are chosen because of proven competency, not because of their political views.

That is not correct. There is no such thing as apolitical competence. Judges (especially in countries where they’re not elected) are selected for political loyalty. That loyalty is a core competence. If a judge in Holland ever publicly that sodomy is degenerate he would be removed very quickly or never appointed to higher office. Politics are considered a core competency

No, you just do an internship with the prosecutors office. Normally you are a lawyer first.

And probably a lawyer on state employ. I doubt judges are being pulled up from private practice in large numbers.

And don't US judges often also start as prosecutors?

It depends, in areas where judges are appointed they nearly always come out of public service, meaning prosecution, attorney general, or public defenders. In areas where they’re elected it depends on who the public chooses

So I am not sure what you are trying to unsuccessfully imply here.

You do not seem to understand the basics of the law it seems, in the US other officers are also questioned for their opinion or what they witnessed.

You made a claim that the other officer saw no need to use a firearm and you used this to support prosecution. This is using the state of mind of a third party to prove state of mind of the defendant. It is not supposed to be done in countries with fair judicial systems

 

[Peter King]

Well, legally, if he was just sitting there in a mess of hacked up body parts and gnawing on a finger bone when the cops showed up he would NOT be an imminent threat even over here. According to the OP, however, he was waving the axe and had already injured at least two people so any move toward the cop was probably completely justified, at least on this side of the pond.

This is a video of the shooting/arrest, as far as we can see there is no officer close to the man and he was indeed talking more to himself than charging anyone/the police

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

While a 36 year old man is waving with an axe a police officer shot him in the chest. Prosecution not convinced of self defense.

An agent who shot a suspect in the Neptunusstreet in the Hague is going to be prosecuted by the prosecutors office. The police officer shot the man while he was waving around an axe. The prosecution however is not convinced of imminent danger.

The 36 year old man was walking through Scheveningen (a neighborhood in the Hague) in May of 2020 and his behavior seemed to be one of a man with mental issues. He was hitting doors with the axe and had injured 2 people on the street. Officers who had rushed to the scene took their weapons out of their holsters and ordered the suspect to surrender.

The man did not respond to any directions given by the police. At a certain moment the officer aimed, according to his own statements, at the stomach of the suspect. He hit the man in the chest. The suspect was seriously injured and transported to the hospital. The officer said he shot out of self defense because the man with the axe was an imminent threat to a fellow officer.

I would be inclined to think that was "a good shoot".

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

This is a video of the shooting/arrest, as far as we can see there is no officer close to the man and he was indeed talking more to himself than charging anyone/the police

You guys SAID he'd already injured two people.

 

[Lutherf]

This is a video of the shooting/arrest, as far as we can see there is no officer close to the man and he was indeed talking more to himself than charging anyone/the police

That's really weird. The beginning of the video shows the guy on the sidewalk and it sure sounds like he's shot but doesn't respond. The second view doesn't show the actual shooting but the guy is in the middle of the road and it looks like he just fell when the camera pans to him.

I will agree that he does not appear to be an imminent threat from either view.

 

[Peter King]

Dutch ethnicity, not nationality. The people predate the existence of the state

The Dutch ethnicity? The state in it's current version has been in place since 1945 or so. Most people are born in the era of the social welfare state. This does not have to do with ethnicity but the standard of living and the lack of inhibitions when it comes to weapons and gangs.

Yeah, except you saw it as relevant to include this.

Yes, and I stand by the observation, but as I am not part of the prosecutions or have any influence regarding the investigation this comment is just my musings.

That is not correct. There is no such thing as apolitical come in Holland ever publicly that sodomy is degenerate he would be removed very quickly or never appointed to higher office. Politics are considered a core competency

That is nonsense, you know absolutely nothing about our judicial system. That is a fact. Judicial appointments are apolitical.

There is no political party influence on the appointment of judges. Every judge has to report all side functions that can influence their impartiality. Even political side functions like being member of a city council have to be reported. Judges will recuse themselves if the court case is about a sporting club of which he is a member. That is also why there are in serious cases 3 judges and every suspect/lawyer can ask a special court to deem the presiding judge or one of the other judges as impossible to rule in that case. Impartiality is all but guaranteed because this special court has the ability to remove any judge if there is a suspicion of not being impartial or in cases of conflict of interest.

And probably a lawyer on state employ. I doubt judges are being pulled up from private practice in large numbers.

And our lawyers are not in state employ, they have private offices and get paid on a case by case reimbursement of costs, they also do non pro-deo cases.

It depends, in areas where judges are appointed they nearly always come out of public service, meaning prosecution, attorney general, or public defenders. In areas where they’re elected it depends on who the public chooses

Our judges just do a stint at the prosecution between 1 week and 6 months. A judge goes to a training/school/education for becoming a judge.
Prosecutors have their own education.

Judges in the Netherlands are impartial, they cannot be removed by the government or be appointed by the government on political views of a judge. They are beholden to no-one.

You made a claim that the other officer saw no need to use a firearm and you used this to support prosecution. This is using the state of mind of a third party to prove state of mind of the defendant. It is not supposed to be done in countries with fair judicial systems

actually I stated a fact and I said to me that sounds telling. I am however not the prosecutor, a lawyer or the judge. So my musings about this has zero to do with the judicial system or with state of mind issues. And as we rank in the top 5 of world justice project last year. So I am pretty sure we have a very fair judicial system.

 

[Peter King]

You guys SAID he'd already injured two people.

From what I know they were minor injuries, not serious ones.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

From what I know they were minor injuries, not serious ones.

What does it matter? Sheer DUMB LUCK that they weren't gravely injured and sheer dumb luck they weren't killed.
People GIVE police these powers so that they can protect society FROM axe wielding maniacs.
If there's a way to deescalate, I'm all for it, even here in our gun-happy country.

But an axe wielding maniac running around on the street is an immediate threat to life and safety, period, end of story.
This is not a meadowlark trying to beat people to death with tulips, it's a maniac with an axe.

EU cops have a strong enough record as it is, there's seldom ANY police killings over there, and Europeans have every right to be proud of that, and we here in USA can take a lesson from that.
But now it looks like you guys are taking it a little too far...it's called overreach.

 

[Peter]

A lot of the tactics used by US police would be completely unacceptable in many parts of Europe.