The Belgian state is liable for the rape and death of Julie Van Espen a court in Brussels has ruled. Julie's family had taken the Belgian state to court because they felt it had made mistakes in dealing with Julie’s killer Steve Bakelmans. The Belgian state must now pay the relatives provisional damages of 1 euro.
Belgian state found responsible for rape and death of Julie Van Espen
Julie Van Espen was raped and murdered along the Albert Canal in Antwerp on 4 May 2019.
Her killer, Steve Bakelmans, had been convicted of another rape, but had appealed and was not immediately arrested. This allowed him to be at liberty on 4 May 2019.
According to the court, the main problem was the excessive length of time it took the Antwerp appeal court to hear that case. As a result, the executive branch, which is responsible for justice department staff, committed an error.
The Belgian state’s liability has now been established, although the verdict can still be appealed. Lawyer Stijn Verbist, representing Julie’s relatives, called the verdict ‘historic’. ‘Personally, I think it is time for apologies,’ he said.
Justice department also made mistakes
In addition to problems caused by staff shortages, the appeal court also made mistakes, causing Bakelmans' trial to drag on for too long. Especially the closure of a certain court, without prior screening or a selection of cases based on priority principles, was not correct, the court in Brussels now ruled.
Because of that court’s closure, a lot of cases including the one against Bakelmans were postponed indefinitely.
The judge said that this is not what can be expected of ‘a normally careful and foresighted judiciary, placed in these circumstances’.
No absolute certainty
The court, however, ruled that there was ‘no absolute certainty’ that Julie would still be alive if Bakelmans's case had been handled correctly and if he had then been incarcerated. ‘No one can predict the future or see into someone else's head,’ the verdict reads.
In other words, even if Bakelmans's case had been dealt with sooner and he had also been convicted on appeal, there is no certainty that the court would have ordered his immediate arrest. After all, the ‘likelihood of repeat offending’ as a criterion was then not a legal criterion for immediate arrest.
Nevertheless, the court said, it is established that the mistakes made by the Belgian state ‘definitively deprived the Van Espen Family of the opportunity to avoid the loss of their daughter/sister.’ The errors of the judiciary and the executive were a ‘necessary condition’ for this.
‘There was a 50% probability of avoiding the facts of 4 May,’ the court said. ‘The Belgian state is thus liable.’
The family will now receive provisional compensation of 1 euro and can start proceedings to assess the damage suffered.
