Fleur’s mother placed a framed photo of her daughter on the table in the courtroom on Thursday. “I want the suspects to look closely at Fleur,” she said. The woman herself looked intently at Stint entrepreneurs Edwin Renzen and Peter Noorlander, who were sitting to her right. Fleur, a six-year-old girl who “wanted to be a princess so badly that she even put her brother in a princess dress when dressing up,” was one of the fatalities in an accident with a Stint in Oss.
On September 20, 2018, the Stint, an electric handcart, was unable to brake just before a railway crossing, after which it was hit by a train. Four children died. A fifth occupant and the after-school care worker who drove the cart were seriously injured.
The evening of the incident, Fleur’s mother visited her daughter at the morgue. “I didn’t even recognize her, only by her hands and her painted nails. Her wavy blonde hair, of which she was so proud, was completely gone.”
After two days full of jargon such as ‘neutral wire’, ‘return spring’ and ‘Machine Directive’, day three of the criminal case against the Stint producers was about anger, powerlessness and sadness. Relatives and victims of the Saint Nicholas accident seven years ago had their say.
Harmful product
The case does not revolve around the fatal incident, but about the broader question of whether Renzen and Noorlander had, in the words of the Public Prosecution Service, “harmful product” on the market and whether they committed forgery. On Wednesday, Noorlander admitted that he had modified the Stint’s manual on the day of the accident before sending it to the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. Noorlander removed the passage stating that the Stint met European safety guidelines. Because the cart had not been tested on that.
The parents accused the Stint entrepreneurs of “ill-considered decisions” that did not improve safety. Fleur’s mother mentioned an emergency stop button, which was initially on the Stints, but was removed after a few years. “Safety was not the priority, but innovation.”
Moreover, the relatives and victims stated that the Stint producers did not contact them, or did not contact them until years after the accident. “Our last name was written incorrectly in the letter,” Fleur’s mother said on Thursday.
Another parent present referred to a media appearance in which Renzen wondered how he should explain to his children that his company was bankrupt. “I had to explain to our daughter that she would never see Kris again,” said the father of four-year-old Kris. Between his tears, the father called the Stint producers “pit bulls who only pursue their own self-interest.”
I didn’t even recognize her, only by her hands and her painted nails. Her wavy blonde hair, of which she was so proud, was completely gone
The mother of eight-year-old Dana and four-year-old Liva turned to the suspects. “Because of your negligence, my daughters died, my life collapsed,” she said. Moments earlier, her husband had told how his day had started (“going to construction”) and ended (“signing two death certificates, that’s not what a father should do”).
In the courtroom, the father sat next to his eldest daughter. In 2018 she was eleven. She was also in the Stint and was seriously injured. Now she gently stroked her father’s back when things got tough. The daughter herself said that a few days before the accident she was also in a Stint that came to a standstill on the track. “Fortunately, no train arrived at that time. Why didn’t you listen again and again and not get those Stints back?” The daughter “doesn’t need any apologies or sympathy.” That is “too little, too late”.
Heroine
The daycare worker who drove the Stint was also in the courtroom. One parent called her a “heroine” because she had tried to prevent the accident. The woman, who has never been in public before, had her lawyer read a statement. “From one moment to the next I had no way of stopping the Stint. The sound of that moment is an indelible memory.” She said to the Stint entrepreneurs: “You invented, promoted and marketed the Stint. I am very sorry, because it was not in order.”
After all the statements, the judge looked thoughtfully around the room. “These words made a huge impression,” he concluded. This also applied to the Stint producers. “An enormous amount of compassion,” Renzen said quietly. “I have always been aware of the suffering and sadness,” said Noorlander.
Both men walked out of the room with an A4 piece of paper in their hands. They got it from Kris’ father, it had a large portrait photo of his deceased son.
The case will continue on Monday, when the Public Prosecution Service will issue a sentence.
Also read
On the first day of the Stint process, the products were given their say. ‘The question of what happened has dominated our lives in recent years’
NEW: Give this item as a gift
As an NRC subscriber you can subscribe every month 10 articles give as a gift to someone without an NRC subscription. The recipient can read the article directly, without a paywall.
The journalistic principles of NRC