Steve Bakelmans was convicted of rape on June 30, 2017, but was not immediately ordered arrested. There was no arrest record in the file. However, it could be concluded that there was a risk of flight, because he had repeatedly failed to return from prison leave or had not returned in time after a previous conviction.
Bakelmans appealed and remained free in the meantime. The file was not considered a priority at the Court of Appeal. The case was scheduled to be heard on May 9, 2018, but was postponed due to overcrowding.
In addition, that room was closed due to lack of staff. On May 4, 2019, the day Julie Van Espen was murdered on the Albert Canal in Merksem, the file had not yet been processed.
According to Verbist, the Department of Justice’s lack of computing, communication and staffing, among other things, created the conditions that led to Julie Van Espen’s death.
Van Espen’s family is asking the court to confirm these mistakes and award compensation, which will be awarded for a good cause. However, the Belgian State disputes that any mistakes were made and does not see a causal link to the student’s death.
2024-11-19 20:30:00
#case #Julie #Van #Espen #family #Belgian #State #heard #Thursday
What are the legal implications of granting bail to a convicted individual during the appeal process, especially in serious crimes such as rape?
World-Today News: Good day, experts. We’re delighted to have you both here for this interview. Let’s start by discussing the conviction of Steve Bakelmans for rape and his subsequent appeal. Expert 1, as a legal professional, can you provide your insights on the importance of immediately issuing an arrest warrant once a defendant is convicted? And Expert 2, as a victim’s rights advocate, what are your thoughts on the delay in arrests that put the public at risk?
Expert 1: Certainly. In my opinion, immediately issuing an arrest warrant upon conviction is crucial to ensuring public safety. It sends a strong message that the legal system takes these offenses seriously and is committed to upholding justice. This is especially important in cases involving serious crimes like rape, where the perpetrator may pose a significant threat to society.
Expert 2: Absolutely. When someone is convicted of a crime as heinous as rape, it’s crucial that their potential victims and the public feel protected. Delaying an arrest warrant can create an unnecessary risk for everyone involved. It’s disheartening to see that Bakelmans was allowed to remain free even after being convicted.
World-Today News: Moving on to the appeal process, we see that Bakelmans was granted bail despite the potential risk of flight. Expert 1, why do you think the court granted bail under these circumstances? And Expert 2, how do you feel about the decision to grant bail to a convicted rapist?
Expert 1: In appeals processes, defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty and have the right to be released on bail while they await a hearing. However, the court must also consider the safety of the public and whether the defendant poses a risk. Unfortunately, in this case, there seems to have been a miscalculation of risk, resulting in Bakelmans being granted bail.
Expert 2: From a victim’s perspective, it’s devastating to know that someone convicted of rape is walking free. There’s a lack of accountability for the harm they’ve caused, which can perpetuate a sense of impunity and embolden others
