Ambulance workers angry that the Public Prosecution Service is not appealing against the attacker

It was a priority A1 report, or in other words: it couldn’t be more urgent. Ambulance worker Wim still remembers the assignment: a corona patient urgently needed oxygen. He went out with his colleague. The siren is on, the blue lights too. But a man was standing in front of the house unloading paint buckets. The ambulance staff asked if he wanted to put his car away, because they could not get through with the stretcher. He didn’t.

“We asked a second time,” says Wim. The man started swearing, the ambulance worker remembers: “I’ll hit you in your cancer face.” And: “I’ll kick your cancer legs.” Wim says he was pulled out of the car. “My colleague was attacked with a large paint block. We called the police via an emergency button and had to lock ourselves in the back of the ambulance.” Due to the delay, the patient had to wait about ten minutes for oxygen.

The incident had a major impact on healthcare workers. Hans Janssen, director of the South Holland South Ambulance Service, removed the duo from the emergency service, they were so upset.

The judge acquitted the man last July 7, because the charge – threat of serious assault – could not be proven, according to the ambulance service. The statement was made orally and is not on paper.

‘Zerotolerancebeleid’

The Public Prosecution Service decided not to appeal against that decision. “We have come to the conclusion that there is no chance of success on appeal,” the officer wrote to the ambulance service. The Public Prosecution Service further writes that this conclusion “does not at all alter the fact that the suspect’s behavior was very bad.”

Director Hans Janssen finds this decision “completely incomprehensible.” According to him, prosecution for other facts could have led to success. But what is especially bothersome: “The zero-tolerance policy that the government itself promotes,” he says. “Violence and aggression against aid workers would have the highest priority. Also within the Public Prosecution Service. But now they’re just dropping it. I cannot sell this to all those ambulance workers who have to deal with aggression.”

ambulancehulpverlenerWim Time and again we hear from The Hague that we need to be protected

So the board of the South Holland South Ambulance Service has hired a lawyer: Richard Korver. He sent the chief officer of the Public Prosecution Service Rotterdam a four-page letter last Sunday. Korver states that his clients do not understand that nothing can be done about the acquittal. He says the man could have been prosecuted for obstructing or obstructing an emergency worker, or if necessary for obstructing someone’s freedom of movement on a public road.

Korver therefore urges, on behalf of the ambulance service, to appeal. He believes that the Public Prosecution Service should also consider the interests of the victims when deciding to appeal, and that the ambulance workers could not count on protection from the government. An appeal must be filed within fourteen days.

Also read
Why are emergency workers pelted with fireworks?

‘Aggression is becoming more intense’

The Public Prosecution Service Rotterdam said in a response that it did not assume in advance that the man would be acquitted. But, the ministry says, the judge’s explanation is not incomprehensible from a “strictly legal point of view”. The man’s statements are a threat of assault, but not of serious assault. And only the latter is a criminal offense. After consultation with the Advocate General, it was concluded that the chance that an appeal would turn out differently could be “virtually ruled out”. The Public Prosecution Service says it understands the emotions and says that it is certainly not the case that the next person who shouts this will also go free.

The patient survived the incident, Janssen cannot say more about his condition for privacy reasons. But in general terms, he says: “If oxygen levels fall below a certain level for an extended period of time, this has major consequences. The later we arrive, the more decisive it is for the recovery.”

The decision of the Public Prosecution Service is all the more stinging for Janssen because of the Safe Public Task (VPT) program, which various cabinets were committed to. Violence and aggression against care providers, against people with a public task, must be punished more severely. The Public Prosecution Service says on its own website that it will take “consistent and decisive action” against this. ‘VPT’ cases are given “high priority” and victims are “optimally informed”.

According to the ambulance service, that did not happen in this case. “The whole of The Hague, Rutte in the lead, spoke out to combat aggression against healthcare workers,” says director Janssen. “We derive strength from that. But if the Public Prosecution Service acts this way, it simply means that people in ambulance care are not supported.” Ambulance care provider Wim agrees. “We fight for the lives of patients, not against bystanders. The aggression we experience is becoming more intense. And time and again we hear from The Hague that we need to be protected. But now I really feel alone.”

Also read
Fire letter: violence against aid workers is a major problem

To share





Email the editor