The high-profile case came to the fore after the mother reported to the hospital in Enschede just before Easter 2020, together with her boyfriend. The two had a box with them, containing Ivo’s lifeless body. The baby was so badly injured that doctors immediately alerted the police. It soon became clear that the father had nothing to do with the death, the mother had been home alone during the delivery and the death of the baby.
Don’t remember anything
During the trial, the mother stated several times that she could not remember anything about the birth. Although she regularly scoured the Internet for websites linked to pregnancy in the weeks leading up to the delivery, she claimed she didn’t even know she was pregnant.
Faking amnesia
However, the Public Prosecution Service believed that there was selective amnesia and that the mother could not remember very specific, crucial details. The public prosecutor therefore concluded that the mother would feign amnesia and demanded five years in prison and TBS with compulsory treatment.
However, the court ruled that a higher prison sentence was appropriate and imposed eight years in prison. “There is no doubt that it was the mother who killed the baby,” the court said in the verdict.
According to the court, the woman suffers from a still unknown disorder that must be treated properly, which is why tbs was also imposed.
Lawyer response
In particular, lawyer Mariska Pekkeriet-Bischop does not agree with the amount of the prison sentence. She especially criticizes the fact that the court largely ignores the findings of two experts who have extensively examined mother Linde for amnesia.
The Haaksbergse had also given birth to a baby a few years earlier, which was born lifeless. However, research showed that this was done in the presence of a general practitioner, so that no intent could be involved as far as the law is concerned. Nevertheless, it is striking that the woman also did not realize that she was pregnant.
Additional research
Lawyer Mariska Pekkeriet-Bischop therefore mainly wants to use the appeal to argue for additional research. “My client was examined by three experts at the time. One of them is from the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI), in addition there was a psychologist and a psychiatrist.
The NFI expert determines that there can be no question of amnesia, but the other two believe that this may indeed have played a role in this case. In the verdict, however, the court completely ignores the arguments of the latter two experts. Yet they spoke to my client for over nine hours each. It’s more than just a conversation.”
Shorter prison sentence
The appeal before the Court of Appeal starts today with a so-called pre-trial hearing. According to the protocol, the public prosecutor and the defense can formulate their investigation wishes in such a session.
Lawyer Mariska Pekkeriet-Bischop previously announced that the amount of the prison sentence imposed was quite disappointing. The counselor thinks it is better that her client receives psychological help earlier and will therefore argue in particular for a lower prison sentence on appeal. So that the mother can start treatment earlier for the psychiatric disorder from which she suffers according to the court. The counsel also wants further investigation into the personal background of the mother.
Moreover, she does not agree that TBS with compulsory treatment has been imposed, but she thinks that TBS with conditions is more appropriate in this case. This is a lighter form of TBS, in which there is no coercion, but in which the patient has to comply with a number of imposed conditions. This form of tbs can be imposed, among other things, when the chance of recurrence is less great.
