MAASTRICHT - "People who do this do not understand the rule of law. Loss of bodily strength and loss of the right to the rule of law would be the most appropriate punishment." That is what prosecutorAnneke Rogier said yesterday in the Maastricht District Court and then demanded hefty prison sentences against six of the seven suspects in an aggravated assault in Geleen. On the night of June 9-10, 2007, at the Hanenhof, two men were kicked and beaten by a group of -according to witnesses- ten to fifteen others. One sustained severe brain damage; the other a shattered shoulder. The prosecutor demanded eight years against Stephan P. for double attempted manslaughter and open violence in a café in November 2007. Although the court ruled the day before yesterday that the statements of the "threatened witness" 0801 should not count as evidence in the case, Rogier used them anyway, albeit sparsely. She also announced she would appeal the court's decision to exclude '0801' from evidence. According to 0801 and co-defendant Jeremy M.-who, incidentally, gave very mixed testimony and at the hearing only wanted to talk about his own part-P. did kick and punch both victims. "Stephan P. is dangerous. Defenseless unknown people who cross his path at the wrong time are in danger." P. was sentenced in November last year to eight years in prison for co-perpetrating the manslaughter of Fer Loontjensin the Geleen café 't Vlaegelke during carnival 2008.Paul S., who was acquitted in the "Vlaegelke case," heard seven years against him yesterday for single attempted manslaughter on that June 10, 2007 (his involvement in the other victim cannot be proven, according to the prosecutor) and three other alleged acts of violence. "My remark about the rule of law applies emphatically to this defendant," the officer said, after S.'s lawyer Serge Weening had already expressed his "disgust" at that remark immediately after it was made. Rick D. -convicted to six years in the "Vlaegelke case"-should, according to the officer, serve four years in prison for complicity in single attempted manslaughter. Three others should receive four years, one of which should be suspended, and the seventh should be acquitted in the eyes of the prosecution. The officer recalled that the investigation in this case was difficult because the witnesses did not dare to give testimony "for fear of this group." She wondered aloud why those two men were victims of an "excessive, barbaric explosion of violence in June 2007. Perhaps one innocent remark made the gentlemen explode. They celebrated their aggression,knocked off their jackets and went to the disco." Today, the floor belongs to the defendants' lawyers.

The defendant(s) in this case are assisted by: