The water thrower with which a young woman was sprayed over with enormous force during the curfew riots in Eindhoven should not have been used in that way. Jaap Timmer comes to that conclusion. He is a police scientist and has been researching violence in police work since 1991. The woman suffered serious head injuries during the violent demonstration in Eindhoven against the introduction of the curfew to limit the corona virus.
On Tuesday it was announced that the officer who operated the water thrower is being prosecuted for injuring the woman. According to the Public Prosecution Service (OM), the action on January 24, 2021 in the center of Eindhoven was disproportionate.
Scientist at the Free University in Amsterdam, Jaap Timmer, comes to the same conclusion: “Such a water thrower is intended to wet protesters and thereby disperse them. It is certainly not intended to target anyone directly.”
“Such a water launcher is not intended to be aimed directly at anyone.”
“That hard jet can, for example, be used via the ground. Then people get wet too. But never directly,” says Timmer. “A big mistake has been made here. They forgot to put the hook in front of the beam, a kind of damper. After that, it focuses on two people. The water launcher is definitely not intended for that.”
Timmer cannot remember that something similar has happened in the Netherlands in recent years. The woman who was hit from close range by the hard beam suffered a fractured skull.
“You can’t just go wild with such a water thrower.”
“This use of force is disproportionate and therefore not professional,” says Timmer. “The water thrower is intended to remove groups with a staggered jet by wetting them. If you’re targeting people, you have to put that hook in front of it.”
The scientist understands why the Public Prosecution Service wants to prosecute the agent: “The Public Prosecution Service wants people to learn something from this and to act better. You can’t just go wild with such a water thrower, you have to use the damper.”
“Such an annoying mistake calls for good research.”
“Such an agent is trained for this and making such a decision is her profession. This is part of the trade: that hook for the syringe.”
According to Timmer, what happened during the demonstration is very exceptional. “And very seriously. It probably wasn’t the agent’s intent. There was a mistake, a very annoying one. This includes good research, such as that carried out by the National Criminal Investigation Department, and an appropriate stratagem. It is also a signal to the police: this should not be taken lightly. This has got to be better.”
Waiting for privacy settings…
ALSO READ: Police union irritated about prosecution of water cannon officer: ‘Wrong signal’