The penalty corresponds to the requirement of the Public Prosecution Service. It is established before the judge that A. was the one who killed Slurink (33) with a sharp object in the night of 20 to 21 March 1997. A stab in the heart killed her. In January 2020, thanks to new techniques, there was a DNA match with A.
The stab weapon was never found. There were no signs of burglary in the house on Van Brakelplein. Nor were there any signs of a struggle. Local residents did hear footsteps and arguing between a man and a woman around midnight. A cry of pain, bang and open back door were also observed.
Previously convicted
A. was previously convicted of robberies and violent crimes in Groningen in which a knife was involved. He was arrested in North Brabant at the beginning of 2021, after additional investigation. A. had moved south shortly after Slurink’s death. A. living in Geldrop, who was found by the police several times in the gardens of others in Groningen and Noord-Brabant, has always denied. He said he did not know Slurink.
According to him, his DNA must have ended up under Slurink’s fingernails in an indirect way. For example, through public transport or a shopping cart, or through his jobs as a newspaper deliverer and meal deliverer. Various scenarios have been extensively researched. The Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI) considers the chance of indirect transfer to be very small. Experts find it more likely that Slurink scratched A. in agony.
According to the court, this is also “much more likely”. The judge therefore sees the DNA as a trace of the perpetrator. It is highly blamed on A. that he never gave openness.
A. did not want to participate in psychological research, not even in the Pieter Baan Center. Experts have not been able to identify any disorders this way.