The Public Prosecution Service (OM) has demanded a three-year prison sentence and a four-year driving ban against a 21-year-old man from Meppel for causing a fatal traffic accident in May 2024 in Hoogeveen. An 18-year-old man from Hoogeveen died in the accident on the Stuifzandseweg.
According to the judiciary, the suspect drove much too fast during the night of May 18 to 19, 2024, under the influence of alcohol and possibly drugs. Moreover, he refused to cooperate in a blood test. The Public Prosecution Service accuses him of reckless driving.
The first reports about the accident were received by the control room around two o’clock in the morning. Traffic research shows that the driver drove at more than 90 kilometers per hour through the built-up area, where a speed limit of 50 kilometers per hour applies.
His car was also equipped with a so-called homecoming, an emergency wheel with which only limited and careful driving is allowed.
According to investigators, the car skidded in a gentle left turn. The vehicle veered across the cycle path, crashed into a lamppost, ended up in a ditch and was then launched into a fence.
An iron pipe from that gate entered the car on the passenger side and struck the victim, who was sitting next to the driver. He died on the spot from severe blood loss.
The first responders and officers who arrived found a chaotic situation. According to statements in the file, immediately after the accident the driver shouted: “I’m to blame. I killed my buddy. Please help my buddy.”
The suspect stated during the hearing that he remembers little of what happened. “This is indescribable. No one wanted this. I apologize to the relatives,” he said.
Earlier that evening, the friends had gone to a party in New Moscow. A neighborhood community near Hoogeveen. The group had consumed alcohol. According to the suspect, the intention was to leave the car in Stuifzand, the place where the group had left earlier that evening.
A family member took them to the party in a van. Back in Stuifzand, the suspect decided to get behind the wheel. “That was a wrong choice in a drunken mood,” he stated.
After the accident, the driver cooperated with a saliva test. This not only involved alcohol, but also several types of drugs. To determine how much alcohol or drugs were actually present in his body, a blood test was necessary.
The suspect refused to cooperate. According to him, this was because he was completely upset and has a fear of needles. The public prosecutor questioned that statement.
She pointed out that the man was arrested again a month and a half later and again initially refused a blood test, but later agreed.
Although the exact amount of alcohol and any drugs could not be determined, the Public Prosecution Service believes that it can be sufficiently proven that the suspect was driving under the influence.
According to the public prosecutor, there is reckless driving, the most serious form of guilt in traffic cases.
“The suspect flouted traffic rules. He drove much too fast, drove a car with emergency tires and did so under the influence. He consciously took risks that ultimately led to an irreparable loss,” the prosecutor said.
The officer pointed out the great sadness of the relatives. “The mother already said it in her victim statement: ‘A family that will never be complete again’.”
Lawyer Tineke Pieters emphasized that her client took responsibility immediately after the accident and has been burdened with heavy feelings of guilt since that night. According to the defense counsel, refusing the blood test was not intended to conceal evidence.
The lawyer described a suspect who has been struggling with the consequences since the accident. He could no longer live with his mother in Hoogeveen because she lives in the same street as the victim’s family. He also faces a significant insurance claim.
The lawyer agrees with the probation service that juvenile criminal law should apply in this case. However, the Public Prosecution Service sees insufficient reason for this.
The court will make its ruling on June 16.